Kasimir

I uh, might have procrastinated since I saw the books in my local library in 2010, borrowed them, didn't finish, and had to return them Finally been giving them a go again and managed to power through the first two books the last couple of months. They're not bad books - I genuinely like them, I just have inertia starting on them but once I start, I get going really fast. Agreed about the multi-layered storytelling! I do also like his Drakenfeld a lot actually though maybe I just really like the setting and the investigation. I really hope he's still writing but you never know. Last book I heard was the 2017 one which is probably languishing somewhere on my (at this point) months long reading list.

Partway through Mark Charan Newton's The Book of Transformations, which is Book #3 in Legends of the Red Sun. I like it, I just don't seem to be nearly motivated enough to want to finish it. The worldbuilding is really fun though, and I'm really enjoying the rumel Inquisitors.

So, an organised info-dump of sorts: While my policy has never been to solicit claims via PMs, these are the folks who have claimed to me: [Edited to add: Action Scanner #2], Double-Voter #3, Vote Scanner #2, Target Scanner #1, Target Scanner #2, and Thug #1. I have anonymised them because I don't ethically like outing people. I cannot account for any of them being Village [i.e. please be aware my informants may not be reliable, or may have ulterior motives to mislead], though I do believe some of them to be Villagers. With that in mind: Double-Voter #3 did not use their double-vote on the Devotary lynch as they forgot to put in their order. Target Scanner #2 scanned Araris and found that Araris targeted me last night. This is especially interesting because I lost my double vote, i.e. I am perfectly healthy again but chose not to bring it up last cycle in light of Araris's interesting behaviour of crediting one vote to me in his vote tally, which seemed to indicate awareness of my situation. Unless we postulate more Silbers, it seems to be the case that Araris has been a very, very busy boy indeed... and likely visited TJ as well the night before. The really interesting question is how Village it is to remove a role-block from TJ Thug #1 mentioned wanting to get their situation out because they don't want to be side-eyed by the Village if their vote doesn't count. Their ability is conditional (so probably a Surge) - they have an extra life and will survive one attack, but after surviving the attack, their vote no longer counts. Sounds a bit like the Vapor Vanish to me. @Vapor, were you attacked, by any chance? Merry Kasmas, and to all a good night! Edited to add: Right, sorry folks, alles klar now, there was a confusion and a communication error and much misunderstandings. There is a condition which means your votes don't count, period. Likely Vapor has it too. Edited to add #2: @Elkanah - interesting puzzle for you Suppose a user of Abrasion did not vote. Further suppose said player used Abrasion to shift their vote onto Pyro. What would happen? Would Abrasion nullify their vote? Or would this be a way of bypassing the nullification associated with using Abrasion?

Under Elkanah's very specific instructions, I am actually allowed to share the Powerpoint once the game is over So let's find the Infiltrators quickly, aight?

Hello, my lovelies! I have received a PM from the GM as I sent in an order to check out the D2 Lotus lynch! (My rationale: I might not survive the Night, though would be nice if we have spare protection - however, a second vote scanner has made contact, and if they are Village, this gives me hope ) However, I'm not allowed to share the actual PM, which involves a powerpoint presentation on the lynch. @Elkanah is awesome, and much kudos to them because it was a very beautiful powerpoint. Your actual results: @Matrim's Dice: Actually, one possibility I built in was that Devotary knew a double-voter, i.e. someone with that particular Surge, and they were on the same team. But the fact that Devotary's vote appeared, IMO, indicates likely Abrasion action on Devotary, since we know she can't Tension.

You're lucky I checked the cycle before going to bed. I can't scan who manipulated votes. I can scan a person who got voted on and see who actually voted on them. This is why I can only tell you who voted on Pyro in the final count, not what their abilities were, or what sort of manipulation put Devotary's vote and Lotus's vote on Pyro. In addition, I can use this ability either during the Day or during the Night, but I am restricted to using it once per cycle and only to the previous lynch. E.g. I am no longer able to scan anyone from the D1 lynch, but I am able to scan the D2 lynch this cycle, and have been considering sending in an order to scan the votes on Lotus instead. (Once D3 ends and night falls, I will only be able to scan the D3 lynch, so if I judge it's best to scan Lotus, I should scan the Lotus lynch rn.) Huh. Deja vu. Maybe it's a glitch in the Matrix. K. 1. I claimed my background on D1 already, not my problem if y'all don't read It also certainly explains what I was doing on D1. I'm also not really sure how you can take a look at the number of secret vote manips in this game and not expect there to be either a Smoker role or some role that lets the Village figure out what's going on. 2. If you don't believe this, you're free to lynch me and find out. 3. What's the point of keeping it secret anymore? It's not about you. For one, if you really were vote manipulated, which I doubt right now, but if you were, I think it's a safe inference that the vote manipulator is an Eliminator, and a second, weaker inference might be that the Elim team has a vote scanner of their own, or at least, are in some way aware that this is a possibility, such that they felt safe in incriminating you. In which case, revealing doesn't give the Elims more ability info than they already had. In any case, Ash already painted a nice target on my head by identifying me as an info hub, and we have two alleged role blockers, one of whom is also an action/target scanner. I was always going to be on the kill list, though a vote scanner isn't as valuable as an action/target scanner-cum-roleblocker, so I might be safe for this Night. This game is a target-rich environment, which ironically, lends me some matter of safety. There is literally no point as a Villager in keeping a secret for the sake of keeping a secret. The primary reasons had always been: safety, and don't alert the Elims, and I think both can be safely thrown out the window. I don't fetishise secrecy. You think my analysis has holes? Fantastic! So I'll throw the info out and let the Village chew over the data and make whatever inferences they can. And this at least lets people make an informed decision before they decide if they want to take their votes off someone roleclaiming alignment scanner. 4. Since we're throwing charges of convenience and falsehoods around, you know what's convenient and doesn't seem like it's true? >About to get lynched because of a scan claim >Hey I'm an alignment scanner >Also I have an expiration date, it's N4. No. Someone roleclaimed to me that they have a target scanning ability. Sart may or may not have this same ability. Or it might be action scanning. It's not clear from what Sart said, and Sart read the thread but hasn't responded to clear things up. Why wouldn't they? You mean GMs aren't able to class actions differently? Is there a standard way of classifying actions and votes that GMs are not permitted to deviate from that I'm unaware of? The reason this matters actually helps you out, so I'm impressed you're indifferent to it. It's more likely that there is a redirect ability rather than 3-4 different flavours of vote manips, again because of sheer numbers. If votes are classed as actions, a player with a redirect ability could simply hijack your vote too. I was PAFO-ed when asking if role-blockers could stop someone from voting. Nice attempt to change what I'm arguing, but I'm not biting. My point is that at least two players have given the wrong guess, if you count the person I've PMed, alongside Lotus. And as a player, I certainly would be wary of assuming given it's a blackout game. It's not about whether you should have precisified; it's about the fact that you got on it directly given circumstances that should not have permitted you to do so. I'm happy to agree it's not a deductive argument, and can't therefore insure truth. But in light of: You having been scanned as killing Gears (or: You having been scanned as targeting Gears, which is still a question in its own right: why Gears of all people?) You having actually had your vote on Pyro It's a lynch I feel more strongly than the other putative alternative, Lotus, and you can be sure that I'll likely be checking her lynch this cycle, before it fades away. Edit: Ninjaed, thanks for clarifying @Sart!

Not likely to have the time to be super-engaged, but will try to do 1-2 posts per cycle and not get hit by the filter. Expect the usual RP from me Signing up as Rakis Jerzy, a young, theologically-indifferent obligator from the Canton of Resource who was blackmailed into joining the Steel Ministry. Edit: I apologise, but I'd like to withdraw. I think I'm not ready to deal with SE games again, due to RL health issues flaring up.

PMing everyone isn't the same as being an information hub. Being an information hub implies people tell me things and give me information, especially confidential information. Which has happened insofar as I know who Player #3 is and what they can do. Announcing information hubs tends to get them killed to disrupt Village organisation, and so Eliminators can try to co-opt trust networks. I'm not saying you're necessarily an Elim just for this, but I'm saying it's definitely something helpful to them, which therefore makes me side-eye you. Welcome to Cycle 3 [Edited to add: Tell me about it...]

Long story short, I said 7 at first. But then I was thinking of some of the bigger complications with regard to one specific interpretation of Vapor's ability. If you think that Vapor is manifesting the 'shift vote' ability, then 7. If you think it's something else we've seen, like Tension, then we have to postulate yet another vote-manipulator to cancel out any net effect with Vapor. As Gears said, it's the virtual particle problem all over again.

Slight addendum as I overlooked something I mentioned. In the context of Option 3 specifically, we'd also have to postulate someone who can shift votes entirely. Which means a grand total of 8 vote manipulators in Option 3, as compared to Options 1 and 2. This also potentially complicates our D1 lynch, with regard to what went down for the votes on me. My point is that if you find 4 double-voters awful, Option 3 should be even worse because Option 3 basically implies at least 8 out of 19 players are vote-manipulators. By this point, Elk and TGK would've had to be Oprah with vote manipulation abilities: (Warning: gif below spoiler cut.)

I mean, as I said previously, even if you're unconvinced, this game still has a ton of vote manipulators either way you slice it, since Devotary voted on Pyro. Option 1: 4 double-voters, 2 people with Tension, plus whatever happens to Vapor's vote. Option 2: 3 double-voters, 3 people with Tension, Vapor vote issue. Option 3: 3 double-voters, 2 people with Tension, Vapor vote issue. Notice that in each scenario, we have minimally 6 vote manipulators, with 7 possible as well. That's so much vote manipulation that I'd say it's better to just say, that's a lot of vote manipulation.

If you don't mind slightly more contemporary fantasy, I'd suggest the Divine Cities trilogy by Robert Bennett Jackson. The magic system isn't super hard, but it's interesting and makes sense within the world, especially if you can read The Dresden Files. And on that note, seconding Rivers of London and Alex Verus. If you want something slightly different, there's Seanan McGuire's October Daye series, all within the urban fantasy ballpark. But the top on my list for that would be Divine Cities. If you're into historical fantasy, anything by Guy Gavriel Kay, but he has a very literary style which IMO may not work for Sanderfans. (But if you plowed through WoT...Eh.) Thirding Discworld. The turtle moves!

Far too many reveals for my taste! And too many about Liba All we've heard since we came Is Devotary's name!

Okay, so someone is going to yell at me in PMs, for this, but since Ash already decided to paint a rusting target on my head by noting I'm shaping up to be an information hub, what the heck. I'll just do it. (Thanks Ash, doesn't sound very Village of you, does it?) Here's the thing. I'm a vote scanner. Have been from D1. It's due to my background, which, no, is not Physics, and is not History. This is why I kept saying I can confirm what Illwei said - it wasn't just because of his disease description. It's also because I scanned the Mist lynch N1 and saw two votes on it from Illwei. And this is why I did the kasyana thing with regard to lynches and just voted on myself on D1. Part of it is due to kasyana, but I also wanted to create a tie between Illwei and someone else and see what vote shenanigans happened. As the cycle progressed and other ties shaped up, I decided it was fine leaving it be as I didn't have the bandwidth to pay attention closely anyway since I was at work. I told two players about my ability. One of them was the deceased Gears and we agreed the obvious target for N2 would be the lynch on Pyro. (This is partly due to how my ability works, which you'll be able to figure out shortly.) I'm going to leave you with my results: Either we have a role that can legitimately manipulate votes by shifting a no vote to a vote (but do we have evidence of this at this point, apart from this very lynch?), or Devotary used the double vote ability to cast a hidden vote. I strongly suspect Devotary is a double-voter in line with the reasoning I have outlined, and will shortly deal with the various challenges people listed. [Note: Based on this piece of evidence alone, it's possible Devotary is a Tension user instead, it'd just mean that Devotary and Lotus both got punted by RNGesus onto Pyro. I asked @Elkanah (but be nice to have confirmation again) that even if a person doesn't vote, using Tension means that your no-vote will be put randomly by RNGesus.] What does this mean in the bigger picture? I dislike how much Devotary is popping up repeatedly. Some of this could be due to genuine bad luck, w.r.t. Sart and myself. But all the same, that's a heck of a bunch. Aura scanning seems valuable, but I also distrust how this pops up at the last minute, and it could plausibly belong to either alignment. Sart says he's an action scanner, and while I know the Village has some target scanners, it seems to me to be distinct from each other. So no. I'm genuinely sorry if you're Village but my votes aren't moving. @Araris Valerian: I flagged Devotary's name twice because I have a double vote. That's literally what part of this cycle has been banging on about. I wonder why you didn't mention it? Objections time: Wrong. Her teammate could have that particular ability, or she could have. I've flagged since D2 that I've been in contact with a third person with the disease and their description of the disease and their understanding of the ability checked out. In addition, they claim to have been the third voter on Lahilt. To me, the circumstances imply that player is unlikely to be lying about their disease. (Alignment, eh. Not sure.) Here's the issue. Why would a background role like mine exist without a surfeit of vote-manipulation? My results indicate that there's either: A) Devotary is a double-voter: there are four double-voters B ) Devotary has Tension: there are three players with Tension, one of whom is deceased C) Devotary was manipulated: there is an Elim with the ability to redirect votes [ @Elkanah are votes considered actions?] If C is true, I'd consider this to be deliberate framing, since all of these are so convenient. The last possibility is out. The second-last is not: all Illwei said is he didn't remove the vote on me. This would just mean there is more vote manipulation than we would have expected, which is hardly a bad revision of beliefs to make in a blackout game where we don't know the distro at all. GMs have felt free to present the Village with a vote manipulation bonzana before - the balance is we got a ton of Smokers. In light of Lotus, and especially in light of your vote actually being on Pyro, I'm still suspicious. Edited to add 2: If you're all realising the implication is I told two players about my ability during C1, yep! Welcome to Hotel kasyana, Wilson already o.O-ed me over it.

Fair! I really enjoy the F-C Masuyama Broad Stub, so I think our inclinations are completely opposite Medium Visconti or Leonardo sounds sweet - and absolutely yes on the wetness and broadness of Pels. Though I picked up a Grasty ebonite feed for my Pel to swap in and make the broad nib write...even wetter I might have a problem, yeah. Nibsmith and Nibs.com both have excellent grinds, though! And SIGs are great

Apologies: this one is on me as I misread your statement: as saying you wanted to wait and see if the double vote was being used before deciding whether to intervene. Alright, I need to go and sleep, so cards on the table time. I wanted to hear you claim you didn't vote in any capacity during the last cycle because I actually think you did. I think you have the exact same condition that Illwei and myself and Player #3 do. And I think you used it to secretly and with plausible deniability switch the vote towards Pyro, or away from Lotus. To me, that seems more like Elim behaviour than like Village behaviour. So my votes stay where they are. Now, why would Kas go and think such a kasyana thing? #1. Key Moment 1. Let's go back a bit to Night 1, when the whole lab was a-clamour over what the chull went down with the votes. I myself was puzzled. And then, as I've mentioned before, Illwei confessed that he'd used his ability in a PM with me. I encouraged him to fess up to the town, so near the end of N1, Illwei posted. And here's what he said: Emphases mine. Illwei only made three claims: first, he had vote manipulation, second, he was responsible for the added vote on Mist, and third, he wasn't responsible for the missing vote on me. Here's the thing. What is vote manipulation? Is it, by any chance, "I can choose to double vote on a single target"? What about "I always double vote on a target, whether I want to or not"? Or: "I have an extra vote to use secretly as I like"? How about "I can change anyone's vote to anything else without consequence"? Let's not forget standard Rioting, i.e. "I can change anyone's vote to anything else at the cost of my vote." (The last is unlikely given the context of the votes. The rest are all plausible and would tell us different things about the game role distributions. In fact, in particular, I point out that at that point in time, based off what Illwei said, it is difficult to tell which of these abilities is the vote manipulation he claims to have. Illwei says nothing further as the Night draws to an end. #2. Key Moment 2. On Day #2, given the debate about disease spread, I decide to announce that I have been infected with a disease. In particular, I say: I make several key disease-related claims, but they actually don't add anything much to what Illwei was saying at all. I claim that I have contracted the same disease as Illwei and can confirm Illwei's account of his abilities. I claim that I contracted the disease at start-D2, and that I know all the complete rules pertaining to it. I also clarify it can't be used except during Day Cycles [sic; Turns is the right term] though this much should be obvious since it's vote manipulation. #3. Key Moment 3. 13 minutes later, on Day #2, Devotary posts. Devotary says: Here's what I find interesting. Here's my question. Since neither Illwei nor myself specified exactly how our vote manipulation ability works (see: #1, in which I outline the various ways in which vote manipulation could function consistent with what we know from C1), how is it possible that Devotary can be, all of a sudden, so very specific in identifying the exact ability that Illwei and I have - down to the fact it is optional? This is especially striking - and interesting - in light of the fact that it's D3 and Lotus doesn't seem to get that neither Illwei (nor myself, by extension) can remove votes. (Exhibit A.) Here's what I postulate. I postulate that Devotary did indeed vote, late in the cycle, as she is usually wont to do. I suspect that Devotary cast a secret vote, because she knew that Pyro was innocent. (There's a side-question there to be asked about whether this is saving Lotus, messing with the cycle by implicating Lotus, and so on.) I do think that it is very strange for a Villager to want to use a hidden vote on a player without simply outright voting on them. I would be less suspicious if Devotary had just come out and lit Pyro's name in red. Then, I went to look at Elim profiling again. The point about peripherality isn't about what it says about your playstyle. The point is that this fits the profile demonstrated so far by our Eliminator team. I take that to be weak reason to look more closely at you. And you're not wrong to say you don't always vote, Devotary, but you do it often enough that it's the part of your playstyle that the sudden refusal to is unusual - and especially in light of your apparent knowledge of what the ability really is, I think you actually did vote. And you voted on Pyro. tldr; many things do not make sense, I wanted to hold things back a bit and to listen to what Devotary had to say, I'm going to lay my cards on the table now. I'm suspicious of you, for the reasons I've spelled out. Devotary Devotary Appendix: For the record, Player #3 claims to not have been in contact with Devotary. Illwei claims to not have said anything about his ability outside of the PM with me, and outside of what has been posted in the thread. So I went back and looked at all of Illwei's D2 posts before Devotary posted (recall that Illwei hasn't posted since his reveal on N1.) In short, Illwei's first post speculates on Silber's death, his second asks about vote analysis, his third questions Gears about something they said, his fourth talks about his suspicions, his fifth says he doesn't think diseases can spread but that they do have stages, and his sixth points out Araris is weird to vote Mint because he suspects Illwei. Nothing about his disease there. I certainly didn't PM Devotary about my ability either. So where does this knowledge come from? Note: I don't believe in grudge voting players. I figured I should just clarify this before someone throws it out there. As far as I'm concerned, it's done and the case has been closed with Elk's clarification and Devotary and I acknowledging framing issues. In this case, it's specifically the line of reasoning that leads me to suspect Devotary.

Illwei's vote manipulation is incapable of just Soothing a vote like that. Illwei mentioned this on N1 and I can confirm this from having the same condition. I note that this is the second time @Vapor's vote has vanished from someone she has voted for. Third time lucky? Edit: What the Kas and the Illwei giveth, they do not taketh away.

Yeah. I really think there's a more fine-grained way to do it. The correct way is to do it by player since teams do not have themselves their own strategic priorities, and the thing is that each team will have an amalgamation of profile types—it's not really possible to immediately identify which profiles are present but their selection of the kill target gives us some idea of which profiles are dominant on the team. As usual, given the way this game has been proceeding, I find myself compelled to spell out that it is not a smoking gun, just another source of data. I hesitate to say this but I do know some players were taking a Big Data style approach to identifying players' Elim profiles. That would be the natural culmination of what I'm talking about. Also I might not define prolific the same way, so I'm not sure there's a disagreement here As Elk probably remembers. Given the double vote is secretly cast, how would you expect to know if Illwei would or would not use it? I think I'll phrase my accusations a bit sharper, and that's that I think you're playing peripherally enough to fit the profile. I feel as though your withholding from your usual unconcerned late voting is a symptom of this shift and I think this is enough of a deviation from what I saw of you in the QF (the Dark Knight the Korathi deserved and needed) that I'm suspicious about it. I put pressure on Lahilt for this last cycle. This cycle, it's you.

Taking the last first, this is the part where I admit I'm a narrow-minded bigot—the main reason the Eliminator profile mentioned by Araris on D2 disturbs me is just because the strategic priorities it emphasises are very alien to me. Let's take a step back. I'm talking about profiling Eliminators: how they think, how they play. What is the framework with which they perceive the game. What are their strategic priorities. I'd argue that players tend to demonstrate a specific profile as an Elim—that's their Eliminator profile. I am keenly aware of what my Eliminator profile is, and — bigot here speaking — it is very difficult for me to wrap my mind around the sorts of strategic priorities that would give rise to this kind of play. One possible profile is the D2 one Araris mentioned. Page 1 of D2. (Linking on mobile is a pain, sorry.) This playstyle emphasises keeping a low profile by selecting kills that reveal as little information as possible. This is consistent with the Silber kill on N1. Araris does mention throwing in the occasional necessity kill—removing players strongly read or confirmed as Village. (To the extent the necessity kill aspect dominates, I would be willing to consider that another profile.) But by and large, this profile is interested in leaving as small an imprint as possible. I'd argue that if this profile is dominant on the team, we should expect to look for peripheral players. Another major possible profile would be the standard one (or what I'm used to seeing as standard) —ruthlessly eliminate and prioritise threats. Subvariants focus on manipulation instead of elimination, i.e. Co-opting threats or encouraging self-destruction. Consistent with Silber kill if we postulate they believed he was a Seeker, consistent with Gears' death if we postulate they said something. The manipulation subvariant would likely select kills to maximise confusion and paranoia, e.g. by setting up Villagers for suspicion and to take the fall, avoiding killing ambiguous and suspicious Villagers to deny the Village clarity. There's the Burnt profile. Roll dice. Burnt isn't in this game so whatever You get the picture. The taxonomy isn't precise of course.

I was typing and I got ninjaed and I've given up bothering to check the new pace of posts, but I believe it is significant because of the Eliminator profile I was talking about. This continues to deviate from the profiles I'm used to, and notably, the profile I most readily inhabit, precisely because my personal Eliminator profile would regard roleblockers as a threat to be taken out. There are several possible Eliminator profiles that have strategic priorities that are consistent with this kill. We can either postulate Gears said something which I already have postulated - except to be honest, I'm ascribing that moderate to low weight because Gears was being so darned cagey in their PM with me. Or maybe I'm untrustable by nature The other possibility is, I suspect, closer to the Eliminator profile mentioned by Araris on D2. And to be quite honest, I'm kind of disturbed by it. Edited to adjust the pronoun accordingly.

[OOC] @Elkanah, thank you for the ruling and clarification on what is permitted and not permitted. I appreciate the clarity with which it was delivered, and apologise for borking the slow reveal aspect of your game, as I have enjoyed engaging with the thematic academic elements. @Devotary of Spontaneity: Heard and understood. I appreciate that it would have been preferential for us to have explained how things were established, and apology accepted. On to business. I was in a PM with Gears because we were having a ketek competition, at which they were sorely trouncing me. They challenged me to a duel of wits, and mentioned also that they had reason to believe TJ was wrong: that something had happened in their PM with Pyro that had caused Pyro to believe he had contracted migraine specifically from Gears. I now wonder if it was because Gears had revealed their background to Pyro, and potentially to someone else, but I suppose we shall not know now. Gears challenged me to identify their secret and said that if I could work out their secret, I get another secret that could help me in future. I suppose it is likely tied to their medical background, but again, not really sure. Requiescat in pace, ketek partner. You shall be avenged even if I evidently can't write a ketek to save my life. @Sart, @Matrim's Dice, who did you target? (Note: It's interesting the Eliminators went for Gears instead.) Edited to add: Devotary Devotary. No last minute vote this time? Aren't you a fan of them? What's changed?

Oooh, fingers crossed it goes well! Any special nibs in mind? Visconti makes some lethally beautiful pens, same with Leonardo. Pelikan's and Aurora's filling system are fabulous though.

Straw, I think you believe you are de-escalating. I also would like to tell you you're not helping. I am just going to put it simply: First, I think that it is not acceptable or polite to make a paggro jab at two players and frame what we did with regard to the diseases in terms of presumed guilt. More than anything else, that is what made me respond and request adjudication. I do not consider this okay, and I believe we need to have basic standards of civility. I am also not interested in being told that I am 'overly wound up' for demanding basic standards of decency. Second, if Devotary wants to take issue with the fact that we confirmed with each other whether the disease was measles or leprosy, then they had better make a clearer ruling on what they believe the rule is going to cover. If you cannot quote from PMs, can you make reference to descriptions in PMs? If you don't ask a player for specific descriptions but they give you descriptions that you recognise from your own GM PM to be true, is that acceptable? If this is uncontroversial, then my recognising a specific description that Mint used should not have been controversial in the first place. My recognising a specific description and set of ability rules that Illwei mentioned should not have been controversial in the first place. I have communicated my issues to El, since she is the IM for this game. I ask that you drop it, because I'm not interested in continuing the fight in the thread, and you're not helping in de-escalation by this point.

Are we back to making paggro jabs at players? I thought SE was better than this. I am disappointed that we are not. @Elbereth, because I'm rusting done with this. If we can't go a single Turn in this game without having to squabble over this, I request you mods make a decision by sheer fiat, and enforce it so that community members can decide if they can live with it, or to stay or go. If that's how you all want to play it, then so be it. I can't speak in detail for what TJ did with Mat, but Illwei spoke to me on N1 about his disease. I asked for details and encouraged him to come forward in the thread. On D2, the GM PM I received matched Illwei's description. Later on, Player 3 told me they had the disease. I asked them to describe both the nature of the disease and the ability it conferred. In addition, I had already told Player 3 a detail about how the disease worked that had not been mentioned in thread. At no point were we interested in splitting hairs about what the GM PM actually said. As far as I know, that's exactly what TJ did with Mat. There's a significant difference between saying, "My disease is leprosy" and saying what the disease I, Illwei, and Player X is called. Is this specific wording from GM PMs for you? You can decide. Or I guess @Elkanah and @The_God_King can decide, too. @Elbereth I'm happy to be censured for this, if you like

How many more are you making Illwei lose, since you pinged him?