Quick Fix Game 16: The Shades of Threnody

[Mckeedee123 he/him]

9 minutes ago, Elbereth said:

No, that's not what I meant. Not the dagger. You shouldn't have been able to pass whatever item you had to DC. He was already dead before you tried. The item that Con attempted to pass you should have been redistributed, though. To Maill, apparently. 

Then I suppose that I still have the item that Bard passed to me on round 2. It never got confirmed by PM at the beginning of the round, so I was unsure about where it ended up.

Lopen obviously used the knife. That makes him innocent, I suppose.

[Elbereth she/her]

I mean... two knives were used. One, presumably, by SD, who is now dead. So it's not inconceivable that Lopen would lie and say he killed Cloud when in reality he was the one to kill DC. But... is that likely? I'd think as an eliminator he'd go for someone a bit more dangerous than a complete inactive.
So yeah, I'd say he's soft-confirmed. 

[Master Elodin]

So.. are there any reasons for me needing o claim the item I got? Just wondering.

[Elbereth she/her]

Not if you don't want to, no. I'd say it's better to keep the items a secret, personally. It doesn't matter to the circle what your items are, just that you have one.

[Mckeedee123 he/him]

10 minutes ago, Elbereth said:

I mean... two knives were used. One, presumably, by SD, who is now dead. So it's not inconceivable that Lopen would lie and say he killed Cloud when in reality he was the one to kill DC. But... is that likely? I'd think as an eliminator he'd go for someone a bit more dangerous than a complete inactive.
So yeah, I'd say he's soft-confirmed. 

Knives can't be used by Eliminators in the same round as Eliminator kills, correct? If Lopen was an Eliminator, he couldn't have killed Cloud at the same time as the Eliminator kill was used. Is this another rule I've misinterpreted?

If the person who killed Deathclutch wasn't Silver Dragon, that person should claim the kill, I think. It makes Lopen less of a target and helps us sort out what everyone is.

Edited June 16, 2016 by Mckeedee123

[Elbereth she/her]

Each person gets one action. The eliminator kill counts as an action. So one of the eliminators has to send in the kill. The rest can do whatever they'd like, including using knives. Or passing. 

Seconded. If someone else killed DC, please claim.

[Mckeedee123 he/him]

26 minutes ago, Elbereth said:

Each person gets one action. The eliminator kill counts as an action. So one of the eliminators has to send in the kill. The rest can do whatever they'd like, including using knives. Or passing. 

Well, the entry for knife has that little addendum that the Intoxicant doesn't...

Quote

Knife: Used to kill a player once. Cannot be used simultaneously with a Mutineer kill.

Silver Powder: If carried, player is immune to shade kills. Only consumed if the player is inspected during a kill.

Intoxicant: Used to change a player's vote.

Which is why I thought that.

Edited June 16, 2016 by Mckeedee123

[Elbereth she/her]

Huh, so it does. Ripple? Also, even then I'm pretty sure the kill is sent in by a single person and the other eliminators can do what they wish. Maybe I'm wrong, though. 

[Mailliw73 he/him]

Why are we assuming Silver sent the kill?

And I pass to Joe, yes?

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

If we've been following a faulty plan this whole time, I'm going to be annoyed.

Elbereth - Made a rather nice plan. But if Ripple reveals that you can pass an item and make a eliminator kill, I'm going to presume she knew that and made the plan to distract us. Bt until then, She's my number one trusted player.

Lopen - Succesfully killed a mutineer. Very low chance of him having sacrificed Cloudjumper, but highly unlikely.

Zas - Broke the Tie on Aman, and while he could have been sacrificing a teamate to get our trust, I'll consider him soft cleared.

Sart - Slightly less soft cleared than Zas, because he tied it rather than breaking the tie, but otherwise, soft cleared.

---I'd lynch anyone below this line if it came down to them or someone above it ---

Bard and Bugsy - Relatively neutral. Haven't gotten a good reading on either of them.

Mckeedee - . . . His justification for lying to me (To test my alignment) seems rushed, or retroactive. Like he made it up afterwards to cover for the real reason he lied to me. But, if he is a mutineer, I can't see a reason for him to lie in the first place. Not trusting him, but not willing to lynch him yet either.
Mailliw - Probably genuinely busy, maybe sneakily inactive to avoid the item passing plan? Don't know. I'm willing to ignore him for now.
Winter and Elodin - Far too silent. Possibly Eliminators due to the lack of a kill on C2. I'd prefer to lynch one of these two. I'll go with Elodin right now since He's been claiming No item and not trying to get into the item circle.

 

EDIT: Oh yeah, who do I pass to now?

Edited June 16, 2016 by The Only Joe
Read the Edit. Do I have to fill out this box every single time? Sometimes it seems worthless to do that.

[Master Elodin]

Joe, I just claimed to have an item.

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

Right, ok, Winter then. She didn't pass an item to me.

I need to sleep.

[Elbereth she/her]

Right. Not sure how long this'll be... I've taken notes on cycles 1 and 2 so far, but not C3, so keep that in mind as you read through. 

1. Elodin - Vaguely suspicious, I guess? Of the four posts he made in the first two cycles, the only opinion he voiced was that immediate poke-votes were evil. That's it. And looking at his posts C3, the only other thing of note is this (and the fact that he's been busier lately with school). Which isn't even worth much notice, imo. So... nothing much to say here. I would vote on him, but he did provide an excuse for inactivity, so I won't. Yet. Slight props to him for revealing he got an item, though. This cycle he's seemed more village.
2. Joe - currently my highest suspicion. In my note-taking format at the moment, I rank each post. Five is a really village-like post, all the way down to -3 or so (unless something's really obviously evil). Joe made seventeen posts, and the sum of all of those posts is -1. I'm putting my evidence down below everyone else, so I can make things look a little nicer. For now, let's just say fairly heavy suspicion. 
3. Maill - very small gut good read. Been quiet. Made three posts in first two cycles. I'd think he'd be more active as an eliminator, but I'm not very sure. So... Not much here, either.
4. Winter - Vague village. This isn't very strong, either, for most of the same reasons - not much posting, etc. And it's entirely gut. But it's a village read.
5. Lopen - moderate trust. Was reluctant about the item-passing plan, but reasonably so, in my opinion. Was suspicious of Zas' vote on Aman, which I think is very villagery. An eliminator wouldn't want to comment on that for fear of backlash later. But from a village perspective? That vote was really super suspicious. So that makes me trust him. Plus littler things like caring enough about who's on at turnover to ask someone else to do it, and his defense of himself to Con reads good to me. (I also have a fair amount of reason to be paranoid of him, but I think he's probably village. Maybe. )
6. Sart - somewhat strong trust, mostly for his vote on Aman. Also, his repeated focus on the lynch rather than the item plan, of which I approve greatly. The items are important and take some coordination, but the lynch is equally valuable and perhaps even better for catching eliminators. A couple things have rubbed me the wrong way (advice that knives be used early on, the fact that he voted Aman to tie the lynch rather than actually kill Aman (although gambling with a fellow eliminator's life like that would be needlessly risky, probably), the fact that he didn't mention he was itemless until C3 that I could find), but much more seems good to me (questions about evil doc, frustration that not enough people are voting, vote on Aman, well-reasoned points against Lopen). 
7. Mek - I... mostly trust, but there's a few weird things. The whole baiting Joe thing was odd to me: how the heck is that test supposed to help at all? Joe probably got several claims (...if people claimed dust or knives to Joe, again... I'm not going to be happy), and probably better than second hand. So if he were an eliminator, telling him DC had an item wouldn't really do anything. I don't know whether Mek would realize that, though. Secondly, he's confused about the plan, I think, still. But then, the wording of the OP wasn't entirely clear, so I'll wait on Ripple before looking at more of that. Anyway, onto the trust stuff, he raised a good question about why Phatt was killed. His reveal of having a knife seemed ill-advised from my perspective for both sides, but it seemed much more like a villager thing to do than an eliminator. Fairly consistent in defending himself, I feel like? Meh. Some trust. Moving on. 
8. Bard - Weak trust. He asked a question of Ripple (which she nixed) that suggested something that would've been bad for the eliminators. Was a bit reluctant about the plan at first, then went ahead and supported it when it looked like it was gaining momentum, which is a point against him. He votes Zas at first, when I feel that an eliminator would remember he meant Con. He does seem focused on the idea that people not passing is how the plan is supposed to catch elimiantors. (Which isn't the point. Eliminators can pass just as well as the rest of us. But since there's probably only two left, either there's one without an item at the moment and we'll know (in which case we look at those people), or they're both tied up in sending items and either create a mess which we can pick apart to deduce who the eliminators are or they're forced not to use their kill. Which is definitely a good thing. Okay, this is going in parentheses since it's entirely beside the point.) But I do get a village read from him overall, and the beginning banter stuff does read more village - otherwise he'd just say that kind of thing in his doc. 
9. Zas - Strong trust. Broke the tie on Aman. Asked Ripple a good question (about passing items multiple times a turn I think) which would've been bad for the eliminators. Good points on voting Con. Really, not too much to say here, but I do trust him a fair amount. 
10. Bugsy - Moderate village read. Only thing really of note is that he urged people to help out with the plan, which the eliminators (presuming they understood the plan at that point and weren't just like "oh, that's easy, we'll just pass and be cleared! woo! Silly El trying to trap us! ", which is possible) wouldn't want. 

Okay, then. Several things before I go to sleep (which I should be already...). 

First off, why did Con die? This is an interesting question. He doesn't seem like an awesome eliminator target like Sart or Zas. He even had some lynch votes on him multiple times. So why kill him? The only thing I can think of is an item reason. Joe was passing to Con. But if they killed Con, Joe would get to keep his item, and the kill would still be carried out regardless of whether people were trapped in the plan or not! ...Hmm, actually. Wait. Cloud was theoretically free to do whatever action he liked. So he could very well have put in the eliminator kill. (The other possibility that fits this scenario, I suppose, is that one of Cloud or Joe (probably Joe because Cloud hasn't been passed any items so the team would've had it from the beginning and if so why wouldn't they have used it already?) had the knife that killed DC, so one put in the evil kill and one put in the knife kill.)

Ripple, you never answered my question about what you'd do in the case of multiple eliminator orders?

Some quotes I never got around to answering: 

16 hours ago, Mckeedee123 said:

I'm going to chalk it up to some mistake made by the Eliminators. They might be trying to show that they can derail the item-passing scheme pretty easily, but I suppose that's a dumb reason to waste a kill opportunity.

I think it's worth implementing simply because it gets us organized and provides a topic for discussion. There's practically no way we're going to catch anyone with it, but it's something, I suppose.

I definitely agree with the first part. We should probably assume that the no kill was just miscommunication at this point. Does put a little more suspicion on the less active/forgetful players, though. 

I disagree, but obviously we have a fundamental disagreement about what's supposed to happen, so... Basically, as far as I'm aware, passing can't be done the same time as the eliminator kill. So by getting people to pass we clear them of doing the kill that cycle and we can deduce if there are enough items (which there are, now) who the eliminator is, hopefully. 

15 hours ago, Master Elodin said:

i received an item from DCs corpse. What should I do with it?

Pass it to Mek, I believe. 

15 hours ago, The Only Joe said:

I'm checking with ripple, but I wasn't told that I succesfully passed my item, so I think I still have it. I did not receive an item.

@winter devotion Explain, please? And Joe, you're not told when you successfully pass an item or not, I don't think. But you should still have yours, yes. 

11 hours ago, The Only Joe said:

If we've been following a faulty plan this whole time, I'm going to be annoyed.

Elbereth - Made a rather nice plan. But if Ripple reveals that you can pass an item and make a eliminator kill, I'm going to presume she knew that and made the plan to distract us. Bt until then, She's my number one trusted player.

EDIT: Oh yeah, who do I pass to now?

You won't be alone in being annoyed. If that turns out to be the case, feel free to lynch me. I'll be too irritated to be helpful, anyway.

Pass to Elodin, please.

11 hours ago, Mailliw73 said:

Why are we assuming Silver sent the kill?

And I pass to Joe, yes?

I'm assuming it because it makes the most sense to me. We know SD had an item. It was implied to be fairly important (didn't want to pass it, didn't think other people would want to reveal that they had that particular item). No one else has stepped up to claim the kill, nor has anyone said they received SD's item. So it was probably used up, and probably the knife kill. Since no one else has claimed, the only person other than SD it could be is the eliminators. And why would the eliminators kill DC? That's a poor choice.
So yeah. Probably SD. 

Yes. 

Okay, last thing: Joe. (If this isn't coherent, sorry. I should be around in the morning a bit to clarify things. Also, that reminds me - schedule. It's actually a little more lax than I implied earlier, due to... circumstances, so I may actually be able to be around a bit tomorrow. Can't promise anything, though.)

The first thing of note is his poke on Aman. As I've said before, this is very easily a poke on an inactive teammate to get them to come to the doc. That's a reasonable tactic. Can't tell at this point. The interesting part comes when he doesn't retract once other votes are put on, nor even comment about the lynch more than "oh, huh, guess this writeup will be boring then". Compared to Lopen, who (correctly, in my opinion) called Zas out on being suspicious for that vote. Joe doesn't get cold feet about the lynch or anything. He just ignores it. 

Next, he points out a couple of "major" flaws in my plan. At least in my view, I'd already thought of people having no items, and passing knives is really not that big of a flaw. At all. Those reasons certaionly aren't "major" flaws, in my opinion. It felt to me like he was trying to push against my plan while still seeming reasonable about it and not just reluctant for no good reason. However, I could be biased because I created the plan, so let's move on. 

Next post of note is close after C2 turnover. (It's the one with the skeptical emoticons, if people want to look back.) First, he says he's suspicious of the people who voted on Aman. Less suspicious of them than everyone else, but still suspicious. And notes that they're not cleared. Now, I think they are indeed mostly cleared, and this feels like he's trying to put suspicion on them so they're not trusted quite so much, because there's nothing eliminators hate like confirmed good. 
That post also contains a vote on Bard for the evil of Lists™ (although I'd argue his list is much more of a Chart). Reason I point this out is that he then immediately says he's more suspicious of Mek now. So... why not vote on Mek, instead of a joke vote? And he also didn't explain his reasoning for being suspicious of Mek at all, other than clearly referring to Mek's most recent post. Which reads very village to me. EDIT: And whatever happened to "trust before suspicion"? You're only talking about people you suspect. Not those who trust. 

We have his argument that knives can in fact be used by eliminators, by killing the person they were passing to. This obviously wouldn't work at all, because we'd know who was supposed to be passing, and see that a knife was used. The conclusion is fairly obvious, and even if we didn't lynch that person they'd certainly be put under a lot more suspicion than I think they're willing to risk. So this point is invalid, I think. 

Last thing I have on this point is the "why Con" thing. Now, it's possible that the eliminators were trying to frame Joe for being an eliminator - but given so much other evidence, I'd say that was deliberate to let Joe keep his item (or use it if it was a knife - did Con claim to anyone? Because if not, that's unfortunate because only Joe would know what it was). That's why Con was the eliminator target. 

Note: if people would like links to anything in this post, I can provide them in the morning. Not interested or awake enough right now to bother. 

Okay, I'm done. It's far too late. I'll be on in seven or eight hours for a little bit, and then after that I might get on in snatches, maybe. We'll see. 

 

Edited June 16, 2016 by Elbereth

[Young Bard he/him]

45 minutes ago, Elbereth said:

Bard - Weak trust. He asked a question of Ripple (which she nixed) that suggested something that would've been bad for the eliminators. Was a bit reluctant about the plan at first, then went ahead and supported it when it looked like it was gaining momentum, which is a point against him. He votes Zas at first, when I feel that an eliminator would remember he meant Con. He does seem focused on the idea that people not passing is how the plan is supposed to catch elimiantors. (Which isn't the point. Eliminators can pass just as well as the rest of us. But since there's probably only two left, either there's one without an item at the moment and we'll know (in which case we look at those people), or they're both tied up in sending items and either create a mess which we can pick apart to deduce who the eliminators are or they're forced not to use their kill. Which is definitely a good thing. Okay, this is going in parentheses since it's entirely beside the point.) But I do get a village read from him overall, and the beginning banter stuff does read more village - otherwise he'd just say that kind of thing in his doc. 

Hmmm... Not really the most praising review I've seen, but I'll take it. Also, the thing was, the plan needed to have support to work, and it needed to work to gain support, which is what I had against it (also factoring inactives, etc. which is why I'm now permanently out of the loop unless someone dies and I inherit.

Also, just so you know, I am taking a mental note whenever I see this kind of stuff for future games so I know what not to do when I am an eliminator... 

---

I think the case against Joe is a bit overstated. I don't trust him, but he's about neutral to me. At the moment, my suspicions:

El, I trust, although I find her too determined to soft-clear the people who voted for Aman (I'm not really ready to soft-clear any of them, tbh. I can easily imagine them lynching an inactive eliminator to gain a village read for the rest of the game, seeing as they're not going to help much.)

Elodin, I'm suspicious of, for similar reasons to Elbereth. I don't like him trying to imply that three poke-votes on three different people makes us suspicious, because they were completely unrelated.

Joe, neutral. Can't really read him. I seem to be getting anti-paranoia on Shard Zero members provided they're not doing something too different to what they were doing in LG21. I'm trying to counteract that though.

Maill, neutral. Similar story to Joe. Also, he doesn't seem to be posting that much due to his new job, which makes things trickier.

Winter, I'll go back and re-read some posts. She seems more... restrained here then she does in LG22, which she herself said in that game was a sign she was an eliminator, as she would be doing a lot of her ranting in the doc instead. So, mild distrust, simply because that's one of the few things I know about her.

Lopen, moderate trust. Posting a lot more than Joe and Maill, meaning that even if he is an Eliminator (which I'm not getting like I seemed to with LG22), we'll still gain information from that.

Sart, neutral/mild distrust. Can't remember exactly why, but I'll go back and try to assemble my thoughts.

Mek, moderate distrust. I suspect I'll be beating the dead horse if I talk about this any more, but you all know my reasons, since I've talked about them before.

Zas, neutral. Could go either way.

Bugsy, I can't really remember much of. I'll go back and look at some of his posts later.

[TheMightyLopen he/him]

Okay, I'll work on finding a more reasoned out vote tomorrow, when it's not so late. For now though, Mckeedee, could I get some sort of list or something that has your suspicions and players you trust at this point? I've been leaning Mutineer ever since that lie to Joe, but really, I'm not sure what to think of you at this point, so I'd like to hear your thoughts on the game.

Oh, I'd like to say that even though I don't trust Elodin or Mailliw very much, them revealing they received items is a villager-y thing to do, IMO. Especially in Elodin's case, since I don't think of him as as much of a trickster, like Mailliw can be.  

Also, I think I'd like to pass my item to Zas, so he joins the item passing circle, because I have some paranoia about him. Will that work? Or will it just complicate things? I'd like to get all the suspects items so that we're more likely to have them all covered in the plan.

And I'd like to hear a bit more from Bugsy as well. I think he's been pretty quiet lately.

Edited June 16, 2016 by TheMightyLopen
The last line

[Mckeedee123 he/him]

4 hours ago, Elbereth said:

The first thing of note is his poke on Aman. As I've said before, this is very easily a poke on an inactive teammate to get them to come to the doc. That's a reasonable tactic. Can't tell at this point. The interesting part comes when he doesn't retract once other votes are put on, nor even comment about the lynch more than "oh, huh, guess this writeup will be boring then". Compared to Lopen, who (correctly, in my opinion) called Zas out on being suspicious for that vote. Joe doesn't get cold feet about the lynch or anything. He just ignores it. 

A reasonable tactic? How would that help an inactive teammate come to the doc? Has this happened in one of the games that you've been an Eliminator?

Joe is pretty low on my list. He poked Aman, a confirmed Eliminator, and then didn't retract the vote before the mini-bandwagon started. I'll let him defend himself, though.

1 hour ago, TheMightyLopen said:

Okay, I'll work on finding a more reasoned out vote tomorrow, when it's not so late. For now though, Mckeedee, could I get some sort of list or something that has your suspicions and players you trust at this point? I've been leaning Mutineer ever since that lie to Joe, but really, I'm not sure what to think of you at this point, so I'd like to hear your thoughts on the game.

Oh, I'd like to say that even though I don't trust Elodin or Mailliw very much, them revealing they received items is a villager-y thing to do, IMO. Especially in Elodin's case, since I don't think of him as as much of a trickster, like Mailliw can be.  

Also, I think I'd like to pass my item to Zas, so he joins the item passing circle, because I have some paranoia about him. Will that work? Or will it just complicate things? I'd like to get all the suspects items so that we're more likely to have them all covered in the plan.

And I'd like to hear a bit more from Bugsy as well. I think he's been pretty quiet lately.

You might have to wait on that. I have to leave for work in a few minutes and I'm not sure if I'll be able to post again before the cycle ends, let alone make a mega-post (though I'd be happy to, normally.) If I get lynched for some reason I wouldn't particularly blame you guys, but again, I'm pretty sure that I've been acting stupid, not suspicious.

[Zas678 he/him]

Personally, I'd love to be in the item passing circle if it doesn't mess things up.

[Young Bard he/him]

5 minutes ago, zas678 said:

Personally, I'd love to be in the item passing circle if it doesn't mess things up.

By the sounds of things, we're out of the circle unless someone dies and it gets passed to use by an RNG. Unless... I think it was DC who would have passed to you last turn?

[RippleGylf she/her]

11 hours ago, Mckeedee123 said:

Who got the item that I passed to DeathClutch?

If you attempted to give an item to someone who died, it does not go through.

7 hours ago, Elbereth said:

Huh, so it does. Ripple? Also, even then I'm pretty sure the kill is sent in by a single person and the other eliminators can do what they wish. Maybe I'm wrong, though. 

The eliminator kill is only sent in by one person.

4 hours ago, Elbereth said:

Ripple, you never answered my question about what you'd do in the case of multiple eliminator orders?

If there are multiple eliminator kill orders, I would take the first one sent in.

Edited June 16, 2016 by RippleGylf
GAH! There vs. their, you dolt.

[Sart he/him]

Two traitors down. However, they were both inactive. Baring extremely good luck, I believe one of the traitors is at least somewhat active. In addition, I find it highly unlikely that a traitor did not post a vote during day 1. They want to push suspicion onto someone else. I don't suspect Lopen because he killed a traitor. I also don't suspect the people who voted for Aman. It seems way too risky. There are only two other people who voted day: Bard and Bugsy. Bugsy voted for Zas after he made a mistake. That doesn't exactly channel suspicion. Therefore, I suspect Bard. He jumped all over the place day 1 trying to see what stuck. In addition, on day 2, he was committed to giving an item, so he couldn't help his team by sending in the kill. He's my best bet for being evil. Sorry if you're not.

[Elbereth she/her]

Several things to say but no time to say them. Agh. I'll be around a little bit today, maybe, but don't count on anything more from me. Edited in another bit about Joe (bolded for convenience, but it doesn't fit as its own separate paragraph - it's referring to something specific). 

7 hours ago, The Young Bard said:

1. Also, just so you know, I am taking a mental note whenever I see this kind of stuff for future games so I know what not to do when I am an eliminator... 

---

2. I think the case against Joe is a bit overstated. I don't trust him, but he's about neutral to me. At the moment, my suspicions:

3. El, I trust, although I find her too determined to soft-clear the people who voted for Aman (I'm not really ready to soft-clear any of them, tbh. I can easily imagine them lynching an inactive eliminator to gain a village read for the rest of the game, seeing as they're not going to help much.)

Numbered since I can't figure out how to split up quotes in this format. 

1. Yup!  That's why people tend to have smaller point values from me the more experienced they are. I'm much less certain about my deduction. (For instance, literally all of Alv's posts on LG20 were 0's. I didn't find anything from any of them.) Well, also, I look more for things that a villager would do and an eliminator wouldn't rather than the other way around. Which is harder for eliminators to do.

2. I don't think it's overstated. It might, however, be poorly stated, given how late it was last night. I would normally be a lot more aggressive about saying it, but I was tired, so I defaulted to my normal state of being meek and non-accusatory.

3. In some cases, I'd agree with you. But lynching Aman? I don't think so. Not on the first cycle. He's too valuable for that.

Okay, that's all I have time for. More replies to come later. 

 

[Jo and the Bush all/any]

10 hours ago, Elbereth said:

1. Joe - currently my highest suspicion. In my note-taking format at the moment, I rank each post. Five is a really village-like post, all the way down to -3 or so (unless something's really obviously evil). Joe made seventeen posts, and the sum of all of those posts is -1. I'm putting my evidence down below everyone else, so I can make things look a little nicer. For now, let's just say fairly heavy suspicion. 

2. The first thing of note is his poke on Aman. As I've said before, this is very easily a poke on an inactive teammate to get them to come to the doc. That's a reasonable tactic. Can't tell at this point. The interesting part comes when he doesn't retract once other votes are put on, nor even comment about the lynch more than "oh, huh, guess this writeup will be boring then". Compared to Lopen, who (correctly, in my opinion) called Zas out on being suspicious for that vote. Joe doesn't get cold feet about the lynch or anything. He just ignores it. 

3. Next, he points out a couple of "major" flaws in my plan. At least in my view, I'd already thought of people having no items, and passing knives is really not that big of a flaw. At all. Those reasons certaionly aren't "major" flaws, in my opinion. It felt to me like he was trying to push against my plan while still seeming reasonable about it and not just reluctant for no good reason. However, I could be biased because I created the plan, so let's move on. 

4.. Next post of note is close after C2 turnover. (It's the one with the skeptical emoticons, if people want to look back.) First, he says he's suspicious of the people who voted on Aman. Less suspicious of them than everyone else, but still suspicious. And notes that they're not cleared. Now, I think they are indeed mostly cleared, and this feels like he's trying to put suspicion on them so they're not trusted quite so much, because there's nothing eliminators hate like confirmed good. 
That post also contains a vote on Bard for the evil of Lists™ (although I'd argue his list is much more of a Chart). Reason I point this out is that he then immediately says he's more suspicious of Mek now. So... why not vote on Mek, instead of a joke vote? And he also didn't explain his reasoning for being suspicious of Mek at all, other than clearly referring to Mek's most recent post. Which reads very village to me. 

5. EDIT: And whatever happened to "trust before suspicion"? You're only talking about people you suspect. Not those who trust. 

6.. Last thing I have on this point is the "why Con" thing. Now, it's possible that the eliminators were trying to frame Joe for being an eliminator - but given so much other evidence, I'd say that was deliberate to let Joe keep his item (or use it if it was a knife - did Con claim to anyone? Because if not, that's unfortunate because only Joe would know what it was). That's why Con was the eliminator target. 

1. huh, didn't expect to see that.

2. I was poking Aman becuse he's an extremely good player who had stated in his signup that come monday he would be very busy. I wanted his input on the game before he got busy. Which is alos why I didn't realy care when others voted on him. He was going to become inactive on monday, and he hadn't posted at all, so he wasn't that useful.

3. I still think they are flaws. I would still rather we didn't pass knives, except to players like Lopen, who use them to kill eliminators. I'd rather use them to either take out suspicions, or inactives.

4. Mek, I still don't know how to feel about Mek. I've always been suspicious and trusting of hi this game. I didn't vote for him, because I can't find a reason for him to do what he did if he was an eliminator.

5.  I literally posted in my player list who I trusted, Elbereth, Lopen, Zas and Sart, in that order. 

6. it was an intoxicant, and I still have it. 

[Mckeedee123 he/him]

Okay, nevermind. It looks as if I can write some stuff today after all.

8 hours ago, TheMightyLopen said:

Okay, I'll work on finding a more reasoned out vote tomorrow, when it's not so late. For now though, Mckeedee, could I get some sort of list or something that has your suspicions and players you trust at this point? I've been leaning Mutineer ever since that lie to Joe, but really, I'm not sure what to think of you at this point, so I'd like to hear your thoughts on the game.

It's not as if it's comprehensive or anything, but here's a list of the impression that I have of each player:

• Master Elodin: No discernable motivations. Tried to be aggressive on round one. Lynchable.
• TheOnlyJoe: Put the first vote on Aman. Stopped writing in our PM after round one instead of trying to get me into his pocket (which seems like the natural thing to do.) I really wouldn't vote for him.
• Mailliw: He claimed the dust from Conq's corpse, which is nice, I guess. I wouldn't object to a lynch of him, I suppose.
• Winter Cloud: Inactive. Lynchable.
• Lopen: Soft-cleared in my book. Possibly hard-cleared, but it depends on whether or not it's possible to knife someone and have your mutineer friends make a kill as well.
• Elbereth: She writes a lot and has very clear motivations (advocating the item-passing scheme, mostly.) I don't think I'd lynch her.
• Sart: He doesn't really have any discernable motivations. Best I can tell, most of what he's been doing has been calling for activity and shooting semi-poke votes. He switched his vote to Aman at the last minute on cycle one, which is sort of nice, but I suppose I'd be willing to crapshoot lynch him if it came to that.
• TheYoungBard: He's been acting a bit like Sart, I suppose. Lynchable.
• Zas678: No read on him yet. I have to rush off, so I'll get back to him later.
• Bugsy6912: Has participated just enough to be considered active, but... not actually active. Very lynchable.

That took too long. I have to leave again. I'll vote Bugsy, since it seems as if he/she/it has been trying pretty hard to post exactly the minimum acceptable amount.

7 hours ago, RippleGylf said:

The eliminator kill is only sent in by one person.

Okay, but can someone one the team make a knife-kill at the same time as the Eliminator kill goes on?

[RippleGylf she/her]

46 minutes ago, Mckeedee123 said:

Okay, but can someone one the team make a knife-kill at the same time as the Eliminator kill goes on?

Yes.

[TheMightyLopen he/him]

Mckeedee. Just so you know, I don't expect anyone to do a big mega post with a list of how they feel about each player, though it certainly is appreciated! Mostly I was just curious about what players you had opinions on. Thanks for the list though.  

Oh, and Elbereth, you say you have a fair amount of reason to be paranoid of me. Really? How come? 

I'm gonna pass my item to Zas, seeing as winter hasn't confirmed she's willing to be a part of the plan.

And then there's the lynch. Sigh. I don't know who to vote for right now. I'm gonna go with my gut here, even though I'm really unsure about this. Zas. My main points against you is your vote against Aman, which doesn't make sense to me, because there were 2 players up for the lynch, Aman and Conq. Aman hadn't been online and only received a poke vote and a vote to tie the lynch(rather than a player being actually suspicious of him), but Conq had received actual votes, so, IMO, we'd get the most information from lynching the player who'd actually received some suspicion on him, rather than a complete inactive. And yet you state that you were lynching Aman for the information it could give us? That's why I initially read that post as suspicious and even though Aman turned out to be a Mutineer, I still think it's suspicious. Regardless of the outcome, I think how players reach their conclusions for their votes is just as important as whether they're right or not. Next, you cast suspicion on me, SD, Conq and Elbereth last Cycle. SD and Conq are revealed to be villagers, I know I'm a villager and I believe Elbereth is one as well. So I find it suspicious that you'd cast suspicion on 4 (probable) villagers like that. I have some reservations about that post, because apparently the eliminators killed Conq and you helped lynch SD, so why would you cast suspicion on 2 players that were going to die and be revealed as villagers? But my theory is that you knew Conq was dying, so you thought along those same lines and decided it could get you some trust because surely an eliminator wouldn't cast suspicion on the player they're about to kill at the same time they're lynching a different villager, right?

Anyways, that's my top theory right now. Hopefully I'm not being overly paranoid here. I thought about voting Joe, but I'm just not sure about him. I've had a slight village read on him for a while, although it hasn't really ever been very strong and I could see him being an eliminator.

Edit: Ripple, when does this Cycle end?

I think we've only got about 45 minutes left guys. We need more votes people!

Vote tally:

Winter(1): Joe
Joe(1): Elbereth
Bard(1): Sart
Bugsy(2): Mckeedee, Lopen
Zas(0): Lopen

Gah, fine. I'll force a lynch.

Edited June 16, 2016 by TheMightyLopen