Kasimir

There's Illwei's Aman train. You wanna go for that?

I'm sticking to my shade guns Default Light Village/Null+ read is always ever revisable and I'm not sorry, but I want to see your voting track record before solidifying or revising against it. To be blunt, you're too formidable a Elim for me to be confident in a C1 thread read of you. I think the only reason I did spot E!you in the AG was because I had such strong negative gut against the PM and the Gorilla defense and Flamingo in my PMs just solidified it. Do I know if I can replicate it again? I don't know, but I damned well will die trying anyway.

A+ ship. They are perfect together, never believe anything else <3

>> You assume correctly, sigh >> Second Archer was supposed to be Ash but it's 2AM and insomnia is one hell of a drug. I sense side-train logic at work again, but yes, I do read the logical direction of implication being stronger from Striker to Ash and wouldn't countenance going in the opposite direction. As far as I'm currently concerned, I'm satisfied with my vote but am both open to and interested in persuasion.

It's where I am a bit conflicted, yeah. There's the whole reason of voting for Archer which is that Archer is tied to him, but it doesn't really show up except...off Striker, I believe. It felt a bit like train fishing, but if it is train fishing, that's...one hell of a way to do it. My vote analyst self always feels (!) about the circumstances but that inherently depends off a Striker flip or an Archer flip - I'm more down for the former than the latter.

3AM So one and a half more hours, though really I hope to be asleep before that rather than listening to music. Basically I felt of all the players in Honesty, you built the most room for revision in: you explicitly told Archer you were open to re-evaluation or reconsideration. (This is something I didn't see Illwei or Striker doing: they just categorically said no.) So given the people who did re-evaluate on Archer, Aman included, I then wondered about you as the only guy who had made the commitment to revise if possible. What I wanted to hear was exactly everything else you said: A. you still object, B. your issue with Archer is one of logic, C. your suspicions are based off weird logic. I like the fact you're adamantly sticking to your guns despite the thread more or less being on board with Archer as I feel an Elim would be more willing to concede, or reduce the conflict, but I'm eh about the "yes this is weird logic and I'm going to vote for weird logic" element. I know a lot of people (myself included) have difficulties finding hard suspicions C1, but eh. Going for weird logic seems like a way of getting off a crapshot. Unsure I guess.

How is that supposed to work if you're not even clear on how Archer's alignment is supposed to be tied to yours? Secrecy, Honesty. I just gave the two extreme positions a neat label and went on. Honestly, I was just hoping I could sort of data viz the position clusters and see what jumped out at me, so this was part of the process. Nope. I pointed out that I don't think you both are actually disagreeing because I noticed it was set-up (or at least that's how I read Aman) as both of you proposing two separate plans but the more I looked at it, despite the apparent disagreements, I think you both actually agree with each other. That doesn't commit me to thinking your alignments are tied, or I'd be tying all the players who agreed with each other in terms of alignment and that's clearly absurd Unless there's something I'm missing out. Which is possible because sleep-deprivation is one hell of a ride.

*laughs in MR56 veteran* Tbf, Illwei, myself, and JNV are those off the top of my head whom I can remember using red text for our pseudovotes so far. I like it, it's traditional, and it stands out, and I trust that there's nothing quite like seeing their name lit up in red for a player to get a sense of pressure Guess my question would be: what sort of interesting? Because yeah you're right, it's not exactly new given the others who have been doing this. Don't know if this shifts my read though but it's a point I'd at least like addressed. If you ID it, please let us know I'd be interested. I get the sense that you're a bit more H-leaning than Archer is, but I feel that's sort of hairsplitting, so IDK. I'm also not certain it's the most productive level of difference to look at, so I've stopped. ?

Was going to do a table but Shard keeps eating my formatting so tabs it's going to be. I wanted to take another look at the distribution of views on the voting, to see if there are any clusters or patterns that can be highlighted and players to scrutinise. Secrecy: <Archer, TUA, Ash#2> ∃S ∧ ∃H: <Maili> ∃H ∧ ∃S: <Experience, Ash, Mat #2, Aman, Kas> Honesty: <Illwei, JNV, Striker, Mat> The difference between the two middle categories is very fine-grained. It may be better to collapse them, but given Maili's distinguishing of his views, I think it's worth separating him into a separate category of his own. My personal expectation is that we will see one of two phenomena, either: A. Evil players will cluster in a category due to a shared doc, or B. They will split up across categories. If A is true, then my sense is that the last two categories, through sheer weight of numbers, are more likely to be compromised. (Given my views of Archer at the moment, I don't find it as likely that Secrecy is thoroughly saturated with Elims, though I grant it is at least logically possible.) If B is true, I think our lone category becomes a bit more interesting - possible deliberate separation of position from teammates? I go back and forth about whether the Elims are more likely to be found in Honesty or in the Mixed categories. Again, I feel that Secrecy isn't the most intuitive push for them. I think B is in general the approach I'm going to take: if A is true, and we have Evil players clustered in a category, then looking across the categories should at least identify one Evil player and then allow link analysis to proceed. (At which point I will laugh at myself if I ever lose my mind enough to consent to do link analysis in a SE game...) Maili and @Bort are non-starters for me today, and I think they should be non-starters for any reasonable player so I don't see the difficulty in pointing this out. I have IDed abut three different players within the categories I'd like to hear more from, to expand the scope a bit more: @JNV is probably the player on Honesty most open to a climbdown, and to have had some of the strongest reactions to Archer's Grand C1 Plan. I think this is notable in light of the fact three different players did in fact shift their views (myself, Mat, and Maili), with Ash doing a weird hop across two non-adjacent categories simultaneously. @Experience makes a mingled push for Honesty and Secrecy in response to Archer. It's a bit hedgy/tentative this early on, but mostly reads like a softwalked Archer challenge to me. @The Unknown Aon was noted as throwing in with Archer - what do you agree with, and why so? These are basically my vote pool for this cycle. Striker, Illwei, and Thaid firmly in nulls - so I'm basically indifferent and can be talked into it. I liked Devo's latest post - I'm not sure how far I agree (the more I re-read the thread, the more I think Devo and Mat make a fair point that some of our judgements on whether the plans are great and will or won't work are basically made a priori and the real test will be if these operating assumptions bear out in practice), but I felt it was a reasonable way to play Devil's Advocate, and I'm also aware that both V! and E! Devo will be very hard to distinguish in play, so while functionally she's not in my pool this cycle, I don't have a solid read on her.

What do you mean by direct? Don't get me started on missing karking flips again Yes and no - but I don't want to get side-tracked. I would agree with this, yes. >> Et tu, Archer? Slight positive for the dgaf here. But I know you're a guy who plays with meta...why do you do this to me...my heart can't take it Keredin is gay which means that sentient drip cups do not qualify for entities he is down to have funtimes oWo with. If this makes him speciesist, he's happy to own the label Hey Albert, are you a drip cup? Because your hotness is overflowing and I caffeine indifference

Keredin raised an eyebrow. "I think we should leave the analysis to...Awoman," he said. As far as Keredin was concerned, he was here to woo Adolin Kholin even if the Azish nobleman was distracting...in the best possible way [OOC: Please KIV I said before the game I will flirt lightly with players sporting male characters. If this makes you uncomfortable, please ping me and I will back off. I'm trying to rediscover the ability to play SE with more RP and less overcommitment, having hit a hard wall in terms of how much focus and attention and energy I could bring with AG8, MR56, LG83, and BT1 all back-to-back. So...encourage me to RP more and not go guns blazing all the time, please? Cannot promise this will hold when ML guilt happens or when there is solving to be done (!), but it is important at least to try to break the cycle.]

What is Maili, chopped liver? :eyes: Why? I'm conflicted because my impression of him is that he does this no matter which team he's on (with a couple of exceptions.) But at the same time, I also feel that when I read his thought process, I can't really see it coming from an Evil place. Which is why I'm kind of splitting the difference right now.

THESE WORDS ARE ACCEPTED. The AG2 Tyrian Eight thank you This: You had a negative initial gut reaction, as I did, and it resolved as you kept reading (or over time/thread-reading and with thought), like I did. I can see some kinds of re-evaluation being Evil - poor, unsignalled re-evaluation that appears to skip steps even with working showed, but having more or less gone through the same process with regard to Archer's proposal myself, I'm not exactly feeling the Mat sus over that.

This is actually generally my view, and I've also expressed before my distaste of overfocusing on Grand Plans C1. I respect their role as a discussion stimulus, but I am always of the mind that players are going to player, and it's a nice way to avoid having to spend more time discussing suspicions. There's something to be said for having some accountability, and there's something to be said for using the PM voting for various reasons, including train baiting and trying to lure/provoke reactions from Elims. I'm not really sold on mismatched votes being prima facie Evil, though I will want to question the player in such instances, and I do think due diligence demands that we do so. In general, balance in all things, and I'm not especially wedded to either. If people expect my red vote to be a reliable predictor of what my anon PM vote will be, you might want to be prepared for disappointment But I do think that if my red vote here isn't at least a credible threat with a somewhat credible promise of follow-through, then pressure on players is diluted. Unfortunately, love isn't transitive, Awoman <3 While you may be my last love, I may not be your last love. Alas, the world would be a simpler place if love was symmetric, Noble One. Then I could be certain that loving you meant you love me too </3 Is it possible for you to at least spell out in raw form one or two considerations that caused you to change your mind? With the caveat you may have done so later but I'm working through the thread now and if you haven't yet, then yes please This is essentially a 'show your working' request. Will wonders never cease. You know my Elim meta when I myself haven't the faintest idea due to not having randed Evil in seven years! (The BT doesn't count in my view - time and hour pressures were too distortive, so I'm just relegated to making educated but potentially out-of-date guesses.) Hmm. Okay, so fair enough. Is it fair to say then that you expect things to be played a bit more straight once we have voting results from C1 to go off? Possibly with a bit of leeway due to anon/thread mismatch shenanigans? I... Are you and Archer really having a potayto-potahto disagreement? Because either I'm dead tired or I'm not seeing a substantive difference in your suggestions - I'm going to assume you're committed to this as a more long-term strategy than Archer is, and also, that you want a vote pool of two whereas Archer suggested...two or three. I agree with this, but I think that's why knowing the suspect pool matters. I could see someone who is indifferent between two or three suspects just going to RNGesus for it, but being able to declare your pool and how you come by your pool matters too. It's the 'show your working' deal again. And I guess in saying this, I've more or less talked myself around to Archer's perspective, so there's that, along with the fact I don't think you and Archer actually substantively disagree. I do worry the pool dilutes pressure, but I'm willing to wait and see - and if enough pools overlap on a player, this should reinstate a sense of pressure. I like that he re-evaluated. We should do that more. I relate to it because I had an instinctive "no, why" reaction to Archer's proposal but the more I've gone through the thread and thought it over, the more I do think it has merit. Same as my response to Ash, in a nutshell. Agree, and balance in all things. No current real read on Maili as I can see that coming from both V and E Maili. I am not fully sold on the idea that this generates more pressure than playing it straight, but I've already commented that I think overlapping pools could plausibly increase pressure, so I am willing to give this a shot. At this point, probably leaning at least null+ on Archer. As I said in MR56, Archer likes his C1 Grand Plans, period, so I don't want to overcredit him for this, but I feel as though while I'm not fully sold on it, I like the train of thought. JNV, interested if this has shifted your thoughts on Archer? Yes. I prefer broader or more fluid suspicions early on - I think we just have to spread pressure around as much as possible. It's generally my view on D1, and I think I've commented before in AG8 that I largely agree with Axl's view on D1 votes but we differ in the details. Not to raise the trauma of MR56 again because flipless arson can go to Braize ( >:( !!!) but even having reads of the people in that player's suspicion pool would help, in my view. It at least establishes a picture of who they're going after and who they are selecting - even if ostensibly at random - over the others. Why though? I did, Maili did. I think re-evaluation is normal and healthy, what is so odd about it? Edited to add: @Amanuensis - Got a clearer read off you in LG83, but I think that was partly due to the circumstances of the PM and my revealing my Security Officer status to you earlier. But as I've stated in AG8, I generally default read you Null+ or light Village early on - as with Orlok, I do think you are both too helpful to the Village to not do that, but I am perfectly happy to revise that view based on reads. I didn't ID E!Aman in AG8 via tone - I IDed him because of his reactions to D3 Meerkat, the PM thing that tripped red flags for me, but most importantly, his defense of E!Szeth, who had flipped. So the short answer is that I never get clear reads on you early on but just pragmatically chunk you in the Null+s/Light Village and revise when more voting data (and other forms of data) emerge.

Archer. Why just today, if randomness is so good? Is there something that's lost by repeating the strategy in the next cycle? What's Certified Mountainous, for those of us who are One Forum Guys? Hello there, Awoman I like your style, handsome. It's too late to be my first love, but will you be my last love? <3 xoxoxo

Thanks, I've just researched the Bachelor to be familiar with the setting

1. Would like to request player sign-up name/character name changed to Keredin. I was not expecting the 'Brightlord' to be taken seriously as it is the standard Alethi term of address to a lighteyes and I'm not interested in confusing anyone who wants to co-RP with me. 2. Would like to know existing policy on death RP submissions - Y/N? @Lotus

Not a big deal - Waterman inks tend to be less of a problem. I'd say do the sample vial thing, and then check it out after a week. If there's gunk, it's a no. If it looks fine (check with a stirrer/toothpick), then you should be good - ink up and have at it! Noodlers' is the big one. Just as a statement of fact, Tardiff also warns some of his inks mix poorly so that one needs especial caution. Waterman tends to be gold standard so it should be okay, just let it sit for a week or at least a day or two to make sure there's no gunk.

Of all the ideas he'd had, Keredin was pretty sure that trying to woo Adolin Kholin was not one of the best. As far as he could tell, anyone with a duelist Calling had to admire Adolin. Keredin'd watched some of his earlier duels and he'd liked Adolin's sense of style. Adolin had that rare combination of daring and pure élan—there was that legendary duel where Adolin'd won his Shardblade for the first time, and he'd only become more of an artist with the sword since. "Alright," he told himself, as he held the practice sword out before him and stood in Stonestance. It was his favourite stance, even if Cipher'd disagree. There was something about the solidity of Stonestance that appealed to him; let the world try to move you, to crush you. The avalanche did not break the pebble; merely diverted about it. Stonestance demanded you stand tall and proud against the world and you did not shatter. Keredin knew all about breaking. He moved through the training kata, making sure to take each move slow. In a duel, you moved fast. Here, with the weighted practice blade, you moved slow. Each move had to be perfect, seared into muscle memory so that in the heat of combat, your body remembered, even if your mind did not. Stonestance was about momentum. Against an ordinary armoured opponent, the next stroke in the kata ripped free plate and then a backhand crashed into the opponent's vulnerable side. Sometimes, the world tried to break you. Sometimes, you just had to keep on moving, keep on running. And there was Adolin Kholin, favouring Windstance, which a number of duelists in their generation didn't. Probably said something about him, if you were the sort to think a duelist's stance preferences said something about the duelist himself, though Keredin'd seen Adolin use Vinestance and Smokestance—not everyone was as flexible with their stance choices as Adolin, and Keredin himself considered Smokestance a preferred secondary rather than Windstance. Windstance for nobility in those two clearchip drama books that Wyrum read to him, for a laugh. "Windstance for mobility," Keredin corrected him. "Yeah, yeah," Wyrum said, waving him off. Keredin took a deep breath and began again. He'd love to match blades with Adolin at some point. He didn't fancy himself a duelist of Adolin's calibre but he'd always believed—superstition, maybe—that you knew a man best when you crossed blades with him. And if Adolin was down for more than just swords... Well. Wasn't going to say no to that, was he?

Let's face it. Who would go Elim anyway?

May not interact well in your pen and may cause a disaster, e.g. gumming up your feed, especially if 'same manufacturer' is Noodlers. Standard advice if mixing is to let it sit in a sample vial for a week and then test it in a sacrificial pen. I have a Jinhao specifically for that purpose.

I'm cool that your loyalties are ethically challenged. You're still my bro and we don't choose our bros, we only back them up. I'm cool that you murdered my bros Fifth, Drake, Mat, Aman, Ash - it's the curse of being a neutral; you watch your bros die as your murderous bro kills your other bros and you can't do anything to save them even though you should've died for them. BUT WHAT IS THIS TARGARYEN CRAP BRO, WHAT >:( THIS IS ONE BRIDGE TOO FAR MY DUDE >>

Given TJ's reading comprehension skills and ability to construct crack theories, I'm not surprised >> Smh bro @|TJ| >>

smh what's the point of me doing subtext if you're just going to make my character go all-out Targaryen >> judging u bro what is this betrayal