Kasimir

See, it's just that I disagree that this sets a precedent - either way, when we know what Straw's real alignment is at the end of the game, there will be a precedent. To be sure, people will be a bit less encouraged to pull a Straw because they'll say "oh, he didn't get away with it," but it doesn't stop a player from doing that and going, "Well, look at MR38 - Straw did this and he was a Villager/Eliminator," so who's to say someone isn't trying that? I think the analogy to me would be like how everyone in SE was very negative on WGGs for a while, because Cessie's attempt at one had failed so spectacularly. But it never stops people from wondering, or really trying one - it's still a precedent anyway, whether it's rewarded or not. With your new phrasing, I generally agree - I wouldn't consider his actions a reason to vote Straw, for instance, but had more people than you taken the bait, I might have then really doubled down on Straw just because I'd be seeing where everyone is falling into place on Straw. But that would be an informational vote rather than because Straw's actions lead me to think well of him - and really, in any case, as I told Wonko last cycle (or was it two cycles ago?), I'd really rather vote for stronger Villager candidates than ones I'm meh about. I didn't swap from Straw last cycle as El mentioned she was counting Aragorn's vote (despite the lack of red), and Ada was winning by a landslide so my voting last minute for Ada really wouldn't have changed anything at all That being said, I had always intended to vote with my trusts for that cycle at least. I would just add the caveat that early Jain really was this bad, until he got killed repeatedly. He was considered unanalysable precisely because he was so random, and I believe it was in part a strategy to be difficult to analyse except he kept getting Villager all the time. I think random players or players with a reputation for randomness are in fact adopting the same strategy, just to a less infuriating degree. That being said, we are agreed that while we shouldn't penalise such players, we certainly don't have to reward them! The issue I think is that by that light, I should be just as suspicious! I diverted what ended up being a building lynch cluster between Bard and Ada! And we now know Ada is a Villager, so I've been implicated in shifting a lynch off a Villager. It should look even worse for me if Bard turns out to be Village after all (I'm still unsure about him ) as I arguably turned a Village-Village lynch to an Eliminator lynch (and Eru help me if Burnt is a Villager as well because this would mean I ignored every single Village option and hit on the Eliminator! Ouch!) Anyway, bold of you to assume I'm voting him because he's a trust I definitely don't trust him that much, and he's probably the weakest of my top tiers at the moment. I am still rather suspicious of you for that single-minded focus on Burnt, but can be persuaded otherwise, and I think some of your late posts will require me to analyse and recalibrate again. Don't forget, I have over twenty-four hours to change my vote

I forgot to add this and then Coda came on, so rather than editing - I do feel that an ongoing game is not the right place or time to debate broader concerns about the direction of the meta, so I'd rather leave it for the appropriate thread than to sidetrack everyone. I think this is an issue that can and should be fruitfully discussed, since it came to the surface in LG61 as well. I also think as it concerns the community and what sort of community we want to be, it should be in a venue where the broader community can be engaged. Thanks for listening to my TED talk, see you guys next year! Edit: As part of my Eleventh Fool powers for this cycle - @Fifth Scholar, does this mean you're giving Bard the STINK eye?

Define 'semiactives.' For my part, I'll define them as the following pool: <Straw, Peji, Aragorn, Wibble, Coda, xinoehp.> Quite frankly, I have very little to go on, so I'd vote by RNGesus. I've PMed Peji a bit and she's understandably busy with RL (Wonko said this in thead last cycle, and Peji confirmed) but has said a little about some of her impressions thus far. I don't think that's really quite enough to go on for voting, and I feel that if I said I were most inclined to vote for Peji right now, it would be due to the simple fact she's said the most (comparatively!) out of the pool. Which isn't very much at all. I distrust Aragorn, and I am beginning to consider that I may have to update my priors on Wibble. I am not really convinced by the argument made for Straw since we're now gunning for two Villager elections in a row. I feel Coda's persistence in voting Bard might either signify they are Eliminators together - or that Coda is an Eliminator and aware that Bard is Good, and so voting him for village cred. (I feel the Wonko argument doesn't really apply to him as he's just basically voted Bard without bothering to defend him.) So I'm negative on Coda - probably the most negative of my reads, actually. I am, of course, open to revising my views if we hear more from @Coda. Wibble has not voted or said anything at all since D1, and while I'm open to revising my views simply because so many of my initial reads have been wrong or off, I just can't do that significantly for Wibble without more information. I don't have any information at all for xinoehp, except that I can understand the frustration with him in LG61. Mild bias to Peji, but I'm concerned it's a bias, so I'd RNGesus in the worst case. Peji's positively inclined So yeah. RNGesus between Straw, xin, and Peji, because I feel it's a low information vote, and there's just not enough information to go off. This game proceeds differently from a normal SE game, and people will reason like that one way or another. Refusing to consider this just means that we bury our heads in the sand. Arguing that excusing Straw or Bard for their actions allows all suspicious actions to slip by is a slippery slope argument. This action is suspicious, and all suspicious actions should be examined. Whether we decide they can be overriden by other concerns is a different issue altogether. I certainly would not vote Bard purely on the basis that what he did was too suspicious to be an Eliminator action. Just as Eliminators can make sub-optimal plays, so can Villagers. And it's true that it's suspicious. I do remain divided on Bard because of it. (My views on Straw have already been discussed.) At the same time, arguments unsupported by actual game data - be it from GM information or otherwise, are merely theoretical. There are some things that should be beyond the pale (lying about real life problems/busyness, whether in blue text or otherwise), and I do not consider this to be one of them. I don't see the meta shifting just because one player chooses to play like that - we could make the same argument about punishing inactives, and that's not a road I want to go down. The community has a right to shape the meta, and we will shape the meta by how we play, but if we keep excluding players because how they play irritates us or we dislike it, that's not a project I'd be on board with. It was not cool when we did it to Jain, it was not cool when Striker got punished repeatedly during my game for what people deemed suboptimal play, and it's not cool now, as much as I am itching to vigilante kill Straw and xin. ( @Elbereth can I have a kill role? Please? This Eleventh Fool role makes me lose all my self-respect!)

...*prepares bunker to hide in*

Perfect! Thanks for the great RP times, Aman! With a mild sense of irony, Aranmir nominated Phellom for the Fellowship.

RNGesus loves him more than you will know~ Oh oh oh Okay more seriously - I saw it the other way around. There are honestly less blatant ways to escape analysis, e.g. piling onto established bandwagons and just not moving your vote, which would be better ways for an Eliminator to slip under the radar. This is blatant (and I'll be honest, a little infuriatingly unhelpful), which makes me think that it's not quite what an Eliminator would aim for. But those of you who have played more with Straw can confirm if it's de rigeur for him. Other things that informed my decision (note that this is not my final voting decision) : I did up some vote analysis (El [@Elbereth] has ruled it can't be shared whether in aesthetic or unaesthetic form]) as promised, and I noticed that I am the most promiscuous voter in this game and I intend to continually be shamelessly promiscuous. Also because: I complained I think a cycle or two ago that we were focusing on too narrow a swathe of candidates so I'm taking that to heart by trying to advance different candidates, even if I don't feel them, and make the strongest case I can find myself making for them, and see if people complain it's thin gruel or something. That might be informative anyway. I note you also agreed the Village can't afford to hunker down around the same candidates again and again! (I realised that in PMs, I was identifying the same few people for my Fabulous Five, and felt that this was unproductive, and probably a product of cognitive bias. So I looked at the vote distribution analysis I did and deliberately picked someone I hadn't voted for and tried to see what might get me to feel voting for them. I'm still lukewarm on this, but this is the best considerations I can offer for Straw. I admit, I was also trying to kick some bushes and see what came out of them.) My current Fabulous Five [to reiterate, people I would vote into the Fellowship today if I had to pick 'em all at once]: Myself, Wonko, Aman, Striker, and potentially I'd take a gamble on Peji, which more or less spells out how undecided I am on my trusts, or at least, people I am less suspicious of.] I could be persuaded to swap Bard in based on certain fallout from the lynch today, which looks more and more to me like I'm feeling an Aman lynch. Yes and no - if their active, discussion-controlling players have suspicion on them, you'd think it'd be easy to throw a vote onto Rath or some other known villager just to get brownie points. I'm getting a bit bearish about 'more information' now, simply because we haven't been substantially discussing, and because discussion and suspicions without GM information (from the lynch) need to be taken with a pinch of salt. The lynch is exactly how we correct our biases and mistaken assumptions/inferences, and we only get 7 in total, and 2 more chances to get it wrong. That being said, I largely agree with you that if given a chance to ram candidates through, Eliminators would have, so the fact they didn't indicates there was no chance for this to be done, at least not without further compromising themselves. (The reasons for this are numerous, and I admit it's one reason I'm still not comfortable voting you into the Fellowship - one natural read of the situation is that an Eliminator who could have rammed things through was just not around for the punch. Given the Rath-Aman lynch ended up being 3:2, it's definitely the case that it was possible to force an evil Aman through. This is partly why I am a bit more confident about Aman.) But I also have some confidence in the proposition that some Eliminators might have been trying to gain trust. Ironically, the fact you didn't push for Rath or another suitable candidate, which would have been a way to try to get some trust makes me a bit more positively inclined to you. But that being said, you could certainly have calculated the trust accrued from Rath would have been negligible too. So my current state of thoughts: Welcome to SE

[OOC: Hey guys, so actually there's a secret role in this game and that's me. Remember there are the Ten Fools on Roshar? I'm the Eleventh Fool My role powers include the ability to amazingly miss out on votes (which you saw in action on D1) as well as the 1337 power to derp and forget we can't vote for ourselves Sorry @Amanuensis I take back my ping. Anyway, I'm a bit short of time this weekend due to an urgent work request, so I will likely be both crying inside at the epic derailment of my NaNo catch up plans and also rushing a lot and intermittent here.] Of all that were present, Aranmir thought that he could trust only a few. Or at least, he suspected them less than some of the others, which was not especially a powerful recommendation when it came to selecting the Fellowship. He had thought Yuriel [ @Amanuensis] might prove a good candidate, for there was a story there which had yet to reach completion. Yuriel bore little love for the Enemy and his Ring. Yet, it was said that Yuriel possessed no small measure of insight, and that her honeyed words made her a dangerous foe to be reckoned with. Why then did those of the Enemy amongst them not seek to place Yuriel on the Fellowship, and in doing so, silence her? There was Gwendolyn [ @Wonko the Sane], the one who had brought the Ring to Rivendell. Aranmir distrusted Gwendolyn's arguments, for certainly, the servants of the Enemy among them were numerous enough [OOC: I take it as being 4-7, with 4 and 7 being the most unlikely extremes] that he did not doubt they could be anyone within the council chamber. They did not need to all dominate discussion or make their voices heard; it was similarly unlikely they would be all silent. Those who spoke actively would become more and more suspicious as they misled the council, and those who were silent or just barely making their voices heard would then be good candidates to gain trust, or to be slipped into the Fellowship by their more vocal counterparts. [OOC: I'm aware that last game isn't necessarily a good basis, nor is the rest of SE history, but Eliminator teams have traditionally comprised a combination of players, and @Coda was clearly occupying a calculatedly low level of activity despite his extensive (and impressive) strategising in the Eliminator doc. Too, personal playstyle may take precedence over optimal play. I'm not saying we should assume that the Corrupted will play suboptimally, I'm just saying it seems a stretch to me to assume they'll optimise, and it's also another stretch to argue they have to be high-activity to optimise. Now, I don't want to hit every argument Wonko makes - I'm flagging this because I really don't think we should necessarily take this as being alignment-indicative even when examining retrospective player behaviour, much less player behaviour going forward.] But suspect arguments did not mean that Gwendolyn was corrupted by the Enemy, Aranmir knew, though he wondered at her ability to resist the lure of Isildur's Bane. Did he suspect her? Possibly, Aranmir conceded. After all, Gwendolyn could be trying to draw attention off fellow servants of the Enemy who were attempting to remain hidden for the nonce, by implying that the more active members of the council were suspect. But he was not so sure about that. Aranmir was impressed by Gwendolyn's defense of Phellom [ @Young Bard], though he was not certain he was convinced by it. It seemed a strange position for one of the Enemy to occupy, particularly because - if Phellom proved to be compromised - Gwendolyn would immediately be suspect. Moreover, there were better candidates for Gwendolyn to defend which would not have called so much scrutiny on herself. To that extent, Aranmir was willing to extend a tiny amount of trust towards Gwendolyn. [OOC: IMO, part of this will turn on which way Bard flips - I think it unlikely for Wonko and Bard to be Eliminators together at this stage just because defending Bard is rather counterintuitive when Wonko could basically gain village cred elsewhere. Similarly, Wonko could absolutely be an Eliminator defending villager!Bard to get some villager cred - but again, Wonko's arguments for Bard I find just unconvincing enough that it seems he has better places to gain village cred more easily! So I'm not ruling out that Wonko is Corrupted, but I am a little more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt at the moment. Not enough that I'd vote him just yet though.] Aranmir found his attention drawn to Astranwir the Blue, however. He had heard of the wisdom of the Istari, and yet Astranwir preferred to make cryptic announcements that Lord Elberond was clearly the best choice for the Fellowship. He hoped Astranwir [ @Straw] could be prevailed upon to share his wisdom.

Shut up and take my money! Also I didn't ask for Colours explosions!

shot through the heart and you're to blame you give gut a bad name i tried so hard just to play this game you give gut a bad name j/k Ngl, after the STINK debacle, I wouldn't trust my votes either, though given how many people I've put votes on by this point in time, I'm fairly certain I've hit at least one Corrupted!

[OOC: Fantastic! Hope you got some good rest, El - you seem really exhausted these days and please don't run yourself down to the ground. I'm still genuinely puzzled by the reasoning for Rath, and would be interested to hear why, during or after the game. My sense is that either SE developed collective telepathy back when I stopped playing, or there's some new argument in the meta that's become widely-accepted that I haven't heard about. Or there's some new consensus about player behaviour based on how he typically behaves. And I'd like to know what it is, especially if it's some cool new meta argument! Anyway. The real issue to me is that the lynch was more or less uncontested (not seriously uncontested, which makes me pretty nervous), and that for someone who was pretty keen on getting lynched a couple of days ago, Aman decided to...go lynch someone else. Moreover, I definitely saw you checking out the thread a few hours before the end of the cycle. What's up with that, then? @Amanuensis I think it's safe to say at least one of the following is true: Some Corrupted voted on alternative candidates [=whether Village or otherwise] but did not sense enough momentum to try to go for another lynch. Some Corrupted voted for Rath in order to gain Village cred. Some Corrupted just lay low for this cycle and did not get seriously involved. In particular, #1 leads us to an interesting conclusion, because I think it reflects somewhat well on Aman: given that no one in the thread seemed to really doubt Aman being a Villager, apart from some "well he's Aman" doubts going on, I would imagine that tying the Aman-Rath vote might get someone a few ??? looks but it's not utterly implausible either, and if Aman were Corrupted, would have gotten the Corrupted a 50% chance at shooing one of their own in. Which would be another indicator for Village Aman IMO, though I'm starting to get influenced - as it were - by Karl Marx - sorry, I mean the Aman is Lucifer camp and to doubt everything I'm thinking about right now In general, I think all of these are probably true to some degree - after all, not all the Corrupted will be going for the same strategy. Of our extreme inactives [ @Pejidot @xinoehp512 @Aragorn], I almost want to say that they might be good bets for Villagers, but I'm not confident of this diagnosis to want to play around, especially because we just don't have enough information to be able to comment much. I wouldn't advise going for them unless in extreme desperation. Peji, at least, has been checking their PMs and has looked at the thread once, so I don't want to rule out that they might be lying low. Edited to add: And, to get things started - I'm going to park a vote on Fifth again, barring better analysis from me. I also see that pinging xin has induced them to check the thread, so they're still keeping an eye on things as well.]

Of certainty, Aranmir could concede he was not utterly certain about Aman. He had gone back and pored over what had happened in the council meeting, and found himself staring at the long minutes taken down by Lord Elberond's appointed scribe, but if there were more among their number who had fallen under the Enemy's sway, as seemed likely the case, they were not apparent to Aranmir, and he felt the long hours with an elf-light nevertheless leave a sharp ache behind his eyes. Give him a foe that could be cut down by a blade; he knew not all enemies were best defeated by the sword, and yet it was the mind and the tongue that had proved to be a battlefield on which his choices had gone awry. He could not be entirely certain of Yuriel, though he thought Yuriel's allegiances and even Phellom's would shed light on the halfling shirrif, and by extension, the elf-scholar Tinuial. [OOC: Ngl, I go back and forth about Aman - my own analysis inclines me to think he's Village though I have worked out some conditions under which he could be Evil, and then I read the thread and I'm like "whoa I stopped playing and I come back and suddenly Ada is Lucifer what's up guys" And then I doubt my own analysis!] What he thought just as interesting was the sudden push for Rath, with little indication why. Aranmir thought he had some idea of what the others might be thinking, and yet it seemed to him that he wanted to know what those reasons really were. [OOC: I'll bite. I think I know why, but - to everyone who voted, why Rath? If your confidence in Rath is contingent on your confidence in Aman - why Rath? I'm not saying 'Please vote Aman,' I'm saying it's not clear to me how Rath-voters seem to be reasoning, and so I can't analyse it, and I want to analyse it I am also amenable to changing my vote as I'm not sure I trust RNGesus or my own judgement very much at this stage >> ]

Aranmir worried at the ring on his finger, worn smooth by long care. He realised what he was doing, then, and stopped. "I will nominate Yuriel," he said, flatly. "Of all who know her tale, she especially deserves the chance to avenge that which she has lost."

But is Bard really a caught Eliminator? Look, I'll be frank - I vacillate between suspicion of Bard or not. Partly because of your arguments, and partly because I haven't had a chance to really drill down into the results like I'd want to, and also because Lord knows Villagers can reason badly and make bad choices. But even then, the mere fact that there is room for uncertainty suggests that the position really isn't as fatal for the Eliminators as you say it is. Even if Bard is an Eliminator, I honestly think the vote is more opportunistic than an actual plan from the outset, and the Eliminator team must know it's possible to attempt to shift suspicion instead onto the other dude who instigated a lynch on not-Bard-and-not-Aman, namely, hello, it me. There are no scans in this game and no Eliminator kills, which means we have less information than we would in a standard SE game, and we have less room to be wrong (though debatable) than in a standard SE game. Uncertainty isn't a great posture for the Village. As such, I think you're really overestimating how awful it'd be for someone to be caught sealing off the lynch on a known Eliminator. Even so, I don't really think it matters at this point, because what does matter is that everyone, myself included, implicated in that lynch should not be a serious Fellowship candidate. I would actually go so far as to say that I would in fact be suspicious of Bard's defense because Bard's chief defense has been to shove the suspicion onto me instead. You don't need to be certain about my alignment for this - you just need to agree that this is consistent with one kind of Eliminator strategy. At which point, I'd once again go back to the whole "vote someone who you can say better things about than "well they're kinda Eliminatory but also kinda villagery."" In that respect, I do believe that you're overstating the case for Bard's Good alignment. (And I acknowledge that in responding to you, I'm probably overstating the case for Bard's being Evil.) Anyway, I think we both agree about strong or informative lynches, so I'll stop here, because otherwise, Dalinar wants to buy our horses. We apparently breed horses that won't die - it's the only explanation for why we keep flogging them. That's fair - I'm definitely wary of Coda, and I believe I have listed him as a potential suspicion last cycle. I also agree we should definitely spread discussion of other potential candidates. That being said, well, the simple response - actually, yes, it's both. The fact we're voting in thread is a public speech act. It is making a statement, and it also is doing what a vote is supposed to do. And yes, I'll bite - Fifth is my biggest trust for the moment, because I haven't had time the whole day to actually do the careful analysis of the D1 votes that I wanted to do, and without that analysis, I'm not comfortable determining where I stand on Aman. Certainly, I'm not willing to say I think he's the most likely to be Village, until I have sat down and actually reflected on my bad life decisions and more importantly, on what went down on D1 Similarly, while I had first said Burnt was my biggest trust last cycle, I am basically rethinking my trusts as well. So she's out for the same reasons as Aman is out. Fifth is my biggest trust simply for: A. making what I consider to be sensible arguments, and B. encouraging an expansion of election candidate discussion. I am happy to have my mind changed by persuasive arguments, or by my own ability to actually sit down and do analysis I have a bit of a negative gut read on Rath, but I think it's for the same issue as with Straw, but I'd need to look back at D1. If it's for the same issue with Straw, then I'm ignoring it, as it's just personal bias (Major promissory note, I know, but I've only just gotten off work.) Striker...Striker is off out of sheer principle. I'm not sure where I stand on Striker now (see: need to re-read D1). I was suspicious of Striker on D1, though IDK, maybe it's residual trauma from QF40 More seriously though, my suspicions of Striker are weak and based on: A) weak metagame reason, B ) paranoia connections, and C) as I've said before, Striker told me earlier on D1 that STINK would be part of their Special Seven. As such, I'm not really comfortable voting them into anything right now

[OOC: Meta used to complain that I had a problem because everytime I see bad reasoning, I can't help but pick a fight, even if that doesn't make the person Evil. I've been trying to curb that tendency but- Sorry, I'm with @Fifth Scholar on this. Like it or not, once there were two votes on STINK, an Eliminator team would be passing up a very big chance if they didn't try to hammer the vote through. Giving up literally having 1/4 their goal more or less handed on a platter for the sake of maintaining cover is silly, especially if the other options up for the lynch are not Eliminators. (This is something we don't know, so I'm flagging this anyway.) For what it's worth, my vote is also staying on Fifth at the moment, as he's at least encouraging we look at other election candidates. Which is what I've suggested as an immediate, obvious response to a bad lynch! That being said, the lynch activity is very interesting in terms of the connections it furnishes and I do intend to go back to analysing it when I'm not rushing work Also, losing cover is hardly a death sentence - I'm not convinced electing him becomes unlikely, as you're arguing for doing just that right now! Anyway, IKYK is a landmine and I've always been awful at them (lesson from last cycle folks: gambling is bad. Don't do it.) so let's avoid that. Even so, I find it very interesting that you think Aman is good but...you'd rather vote for someone implicated in securing a bad lynch than Aman. Seriously? That doesn't check out here, and it reads to me like you're trying to gain some credibility but try to sneak Bard through anyway while the iron is hot. This punts you down into my suspicions. If it's not obvious, I distrust Bard for scoring the goal, but also because I still think the initial Bard votes sprung up very quickly. Good. So you should not have any difficulty voting Aman. I don't really care at this stage if you don't want to vote me (I'd be a bit more concerned at endgame, if I had no other solid leads on Villagers) but then you should go and vote the person you think is good who has not been implicated in any sketchy stuff. Like, really. It's that obvious. Don't take the chance at all. Anyway - I regard this as a more sensible argument - in defending my arguments against Wibble to others, I do concede there's a heavy element of gut, but I'm not really sure why playing like a typical new player should indicate anything at all. Eliminator teams don't play the same way because of constitution. A look at the last game's Eliminator doc should already tell you that. Coda was playing extremely active and strategising extensively. Not all new players do that. And sometimes, Eliminator teams do instruct new players to...behave extremely new. (I certainly was asked to do so in LG5, my first game.) Wibble's improved in activity and cast a vote, and yet despite being in a PM with me and responding to it, he somehow misses that STINK is PMing him? Of course it could be a careless mistake. We all make them. But then, look at the broader picture: Wibble's skated by in the discussion. His main strategic role was to place a vote on STINK, one that I ended up throwing a vote on in an attempt to shift the lynch from what I felt was a quick bottleneck. And actually, that's suspicious to me: because that's a really easy way to set up an Eliminator lynch. Sneaking a vote out in the hopes that more people will band on top of it, or leaving it there for a potential opportunistic hammer. Which is exactly the strategy employed the several times over the last iteration. A final overall comment: I think people need to remember we don't need to find Eliminators, though that certainly helps. We just need to elect literally the least suspicious person we have. (I don't really think we have space for a second informational lynch at the moment - let's just get it right this time.) Suspicions don't need to be the sort of thing that gets people lynched in a standard SE game. Telling me you think something is consistent with being an Eliminator or Villager is besides the point. The point is: why would you even vote such an ambiguous person into the Fellowship? On the other hand, I would also be suspicious of some of those who have generally avoided getting entangled in any of the major issues. Because that's a natural space for some Eliminators to lurk - to appear as above suspicion as possible in order to get lynched. In that regard, I would be suspicious of Burnt; for one, I think she trusted me too fast and a bit too strongly, for another, she mentioned possibly voting on STINK but threw a vote on Pejidot, which I actually do encourage - we need to spread our discussion beyond a narrow set of candidates! - but also reads to me like a potential way of distancing herself from what she knew would be a bad lynch. I would be tentatively willing to back an Aman lynch at this stage but I want to look back at the vote patterns, and anyway the cycle is still young so I will leave my vote where it is right now. N.B. I don't especially suspect @Straw right now, but given how unhelpful he's being, I'm not going to vote for him out of pure spite ]

Ngl, I knew this line would strike some people the wrong way but ultimately decided to leave it in. As early as LG5 (IIRC anyway, it blurs up in my head after a while) - Joe mentioning he knew he was good triggered some people and got them to vote for him. (He wasn't evil. I was.) And in MR4, Wilson also got on my case for listing out everyone who could have taken an action (or something like that) before adding "Well, there's me, but I know I'm good." Unfortunately, I turned out to be Village. Welp. (I've linked the Wilson episode as it directly involves me and it's funny. You get to watch Wilson get trolled by all three of her suspects! ) Anyway, I'm actually not particularly fussed about getting elected, and I think I'm a bit more helpful if I'm not elected, so I decided to leave it in, and to see what happens. Given that something like this has a history of raising the hackles on some SE players, and I've certainly been around long enough to know that, you could say choosing to bite the bullet would be another instance of suboptimal Evil play. Kind of sad if most your "Kas is Corrupted" theory is built off that though Especially since I have a history of making those remarks, consequences be stormed, whether as a Villager or otherwise I accept the distinction between thinking I'm the better choice between me and Aman - but then who did you think was the best choice of all viable candidates at that time? I have not yet decided how I feel about Aman, but I will feel very put-out if he's producing more text than me, since I'm barely two pages into my NaNo I'll sleep on it and come back to think, as I need to re-evaluate some of my assumptions, at any rate, and I'm tired and frustrated with myself Edited to add: Also Bard, I guess I was imprecise with my words because my point was, how willing are you to actually elect GoWibble? I'm interested in how certain you actually are, and I feel betting behaviour is a good model for subjective certainty

Good, so does that mean you'd be willing to vote GoWibble? Because if so, I'd be interested to see what the result is I also note it's an interesting reversal from your previous position where you expressed uncertainty of GoWibble, and suggested that my alignment depended on GoWibble's. Yet between this cycle and the previous, you've somehow decided that first, I'm evil, and second, I'm now the determiner of GoWibble's alignment? How does that work? I think the interesting thing to me is Bard's late vote for Ulmo. I'm understanding of the late part - the end of the cycle caught me pants down the last iteration of this game. But given Bard's resistance to Aman, he could have: A) opted for a three way tie, which would have reduced the chances of RNGesus picking Aman, B ) picked me, which, by his own admission in the previous cycle, he had more reason to trust than STINK, C) left it as a two-way tie, or... apparently, gone for D) voted for STINK. Voting STINK instead of me makes little sense if you think my alignment depends on GoWibble's. Because if so, you can't infer from my alignment to GoWibble's. In fact, if you think I'm evil, you almost certainly have to think both Bard and Aman are good, given that I intervened strongly to kick the cycle away from a Bard-or-Aman lynch, when (on the assumption either was evil) banding on either of the bandwagons would have attracted little scrutiny, allowed me to maintain Top Villager Streetcred, and allowed a teammate to enter the Fellowship! So you would have to believe both are good! And if you do think both Bard and Aman are good, vote them! If you're wrong, I promise I won't ask too hard how it feels to be wrong like I was (I can't promise I won't gloat a little, though.) And if you're right, I welcome it because that gives us a solid two villager lead in the Fellowship, which - fantastic! Note that you would also have to believe that I deliberately chose to kick things away from encouraging a natural me-lynch to encouraging a STINK lynch when STINK was skating by fine, once again tanking credibility damage. I've found simpler Rube Goldberg machines...

[OOC: Whaaaaat. I had gambled he would be Good because I didn't figure my main suspicions would go for it immediately urgh... Sigh. Anyway :/ A few initial thoughts—RP to follow later. -Everyone on the Ulmo vote should be looked at. This includes me, GoWibble, and Bard, but also Striker and Burnt, who both indicated Ulmo would be their D1 choice of Seven. -I feel not all the Corrupted would band on the Ulmo vote as they would know the result would compromise them all. Of all who voted on Ulmo (soft or otherwise), I am personally suspicious of GoWibble most. I can't decide if Bard or Striker is my next in terms of suspicion strength, with Burnt temporarily last. -I would be reluctant to vote anyone implicated in Ulmogate today. This can change as more information comes down the line. Right now, I will slap a temporary vote down on Fifth and go look over the votes again.]

[OOC: Elberond.]

[OOC: Brb re-evaluating as I completely missed Wonko's vote on me in my tally even though I'm pretty sure I intellectually knew it was there, but this might change the entire tenor of my analysis. Sorry folks! Sorry to anyone in my PMs I've confused by forgetting this. I will be back! ] [Edited to add, OOC: Right, well, I'm too done-in to RP at the moment, and I'm supposed to practice not being judgmental of myself so I will not Anyway. I am just going to edit my points a bit to accomodate the new information I've received. I still trust Burnt slightly, but am warier of Burnt now than I was a few minutes ago To be fair, she is definitely not playing the same way as she did last iteration but - really, would anyone, if they were Corrupted? I think I am just a bit suspicious as I feel she's supporting me a bit more strongly than my points warrant She's also neglecting that to some extent, the Corrupted team would almost certainly need a talky player, which could very well be me! Still no comment on Aman, Fifth, Wonko, STINK, Straw, Aragorn, xinoehp512, Pejidot, Bard. I still lean slightly negative on Striker, GoWibble, Rathmaskal, and Coda. I still expect at least 80% of my evaluations to be wrong, but I don't have enough information to figure where the 20% of correct ones are. My ideal first day election would be Aragorn, but I don't see him being pushed through at this stage and I'll also agree he's really uninformative, so I would not push very hard to get him voted in. If Ulmo flips Corrupted, I still expect people to do their civic duty and be somewhat suspicious of myself and GoWibble, but also Burnt, who has noted STINK would be in her Special Seven. I still can be persuaded to revise some of my early judgements - it's probably slightly logically inconsistent that I don't want to do a Bard-Aman vote, yet don't especially suspect either of them. I think it's explainable by the fact I distrust the set-up of the situation but not necessarily the individual players. I may be willing to vote for them at a later stage, at any rate. I still do not want to vote all my trusts early as I feel election could also be a way of attempting to shut down vocal and helpful players. I've mentioned this previously in PMs in the first iteration. The Corrupted only need four seats - it is fine for them to strategically try to silence players. Whether I am correct in evaluating Burnt as a player worthy of preserving for a later round can be subject to debate. I am willing to be convinced to switch my vote to map onto my actual trusts, as this would give certain information too. (And also, the talky player issue - my points apply to my reasoning too! I am fairly (not utterly) certain at least one Corrupted lurks there!) On the one hand, Coda swapped the actual terrain from a Phellom-Aman vote to a me-Aman vote, which is kinda great since I've been complaining about the terms of the debate, but which I'm also side-eyeing over for reasons mentioned previously. Then again, I've turned it into a me-Aman-Ulmo vote so uh, yay for variety? I do not know if that brings trust, but I feel this is a data-point worth flagging, I am happy to flag that Striker also flagged our local lad lying in lakes distributing Rings (Ulmo) as a potential Special Seven candidate, so by all means, do your civic duty there too Or I guess, y'all could lynch me to shut me up and then figure out D2 for yourselves.]

Aranmir wasn't certain why, but he felt...uneasy. Then again, the arts of war were his strength. He had fought long years to defend Gondor, and the fall of Osgiliath had come as a sudden, shocking loss; he did not account himself a leader of men, though he had led men into battle, nor did he account himself one of the wise, though he remembered a little of the lore that was forgotten, even in the ancient citadel of Minas Tirith. In the end, while he did not envy the choices left to them, he had to make some contribution or other to the council. Though he had tried nominating the Observer, that had neither stirred the Observer into action, nor had his choice made any noticeable impact on the debates of the day. He would say that he was wary of those who had expressed some slight modicum of trust this early on, for as far as Aranmir could see, there was little sufficient reason to trust an interloper newly-arrived from Gondor, and one unknown to all. [OOC: Take it or leave it; I'm just not comfortable with that, as expressed both publicly and in private conversations with other players. Ultimately I have both tactical and strategic reasons for this wariness, though I'm not currently in any danger of being sent on the death mission just yet ] That being said, Aranmir knew he had to make a decision soon, although he did not know if it could be a lasting decision. "I would nominate Ulmo," he said, at last. "Surely one revered as a god by the Firstborn would be of aid against such a powerful weapon as Isildur's Bane." [OOC: Several points as I attempt to gather my woolly thoughts: Burnt I trust slightly. I am not especially confident of this, as this is the first day of the council, but that being said, I am noticing a slight difference in her behaviour. Of course, my thoughts about the Fifth-Burnt-Coda collective does not mean that one or two of them can't be Corrupted - if anything, it's a statement about where they all stand in totality. And Burnt might be foolish to not change her playstyle, at least a little, no matter her alignment. So I do not necessarily feel strongly enough about this. That being said, I do trust Burnt most of the trinity, which doesn't say very much. No comment on Aman, Fifth, Wonko, STINK, Straw, Aragorn, xinoehp512, Pejidot, Bard. I lean slightly negative on Striker, GoWibble, Rathmaskal, and Coda. I expect at least 80% of my evaluations to be wrong, but I don't have enough information to figure where the 20% of correct ones are. My ideal first day election would be Aragorn, but I don't see him being pushed through at this stage and I'll also agree he's really uninformative, so I would not push very hard to get him voted in. If Ulmo flips Corrupted, I expect people to do their civic duty and be somewhat suspicious of myself and GoWibble, but also Burnt, who has noted STINK would be in her Special Seven. I can be persuaded to revise some of my early judgements - it's probably slightly logically inconsistent that I don't want to do a Bard-Aman vote, yet don't especially suspect either of them. I think it's explainable by the fact I distrust the set-up of the situation but not necessarily the individual players. I may be willing to vote for them at a later stage, at any rate. I do not want to vote all my trusts early as I feel election could also be a way of attempting to shut down vocal and helpful players. I've mentioned this previously in PMs in the first iteration. The Corrupted only need four seats - it is fine for them to strategically try to silence players. Whether I am correct in evaluating Burnt as a player worthy of preserving for a later round can be subject to debate. I am willing to be convinced to switch my vote to map onto my actual trusts, as this would give certain information too.]

We can do this! Let's beat this NaNo thing like a rented gong!

An interesting response from the halfling shirrif, thought Aranmir. He did not especially distrust Tinuial, which was already a significant boost in a council which seemed clouded by suspicion and distrust and simply, ignorance. They knew far too little about most of the choices, and while Lord Elberond no doubt had his reasons, restricting them from offering their own blades on the Quest also left most of them in the uneasy position of having to decide who they trusted the most - or who they trusted the least. He also agreed with the halfling - and indeed, had commented, both publicly and privately, on his unease about how quickly the discussion had narrowed down to Phellom-or-Yuriel. It struck him that it was a strategically bad position to end up in: to be forced to defend a bottleneck that had been arrived at with startling speed. It was a position that Aranmir sought to avoid, and perhaps Robin had offered him a way of evading that trap yet. [OOC: I especially dislike defending fast discussion bottlenecks, because that's exactly what happened last game - I ended up in a position where it seemed to me as though optimal play was for me to hammer one (Fifth) I actually thought was Corrupted. That might be acceptable tactically but it seems to me that the key is to avoid ending up in such a solution. So I don't want to go back and be cornered again. And of course as I've mentioned previously - it's a discursive trap because the more we talk about this, the more we end up forcing ourselves into that reinforced bottleneck, where the only way to go informationally is to bite the bullet. It's a tactic I intend to keep in mind for future uses when Evil, but I definitely do not want to end up there when playing for Village.] Yet - Tinuial had been the first to suggest electing Phellom. Aranmir was curious as to why Robin [@Fifth Scholar] had arrived at the conclusion that Tinuial had generated discussion on someone new. Astranwir [@Straw] had spoken up, only to offer inscrutability. This, Aranmir distrusted, though he had heard it was not unknown of the Istari to speak in cryptic riddles. Ulmo [@STINK] was of a kind, he thought, with all his talk about names and skin, but he hoped that one would make his will known soon. [OOC: I don't play with Straw so people who do, I'd welcome clarification as he appears to be like STINK, but at a glance, I'm noticing a bit of behavioural deviation from the last iteration that makes me uncomfortable. No comment on STINK. STINK will STINK, but I'm not slapping a vote down unless I feel more comfortable.] "Above all," Aranmir announced, "I am interested in what Aidenn [@Coda] now thinks. He has mentioned he is uncomfortable with the level of discussion in the council, but that perhaps his vote would change. He has more information now, however meagre, than when he first voted for Phellom. What does he think of the situation now? Would he still elect Phellom?" It was no indicator of trust, but if it were up to him, and if he were forced to elect the Fellowship today, without delay, Aranmir would have chosen himself, and left the rest to fickle chance. It was the best he could bring himself to do right now. [OOC: Actually, if forced, I would probably go for myself and the Fifth-Burnt-Coda set, reasoning (defeasibly) that no matter how many of them are Corrupted, it is unlikely they would all remain Corrupted together, which would give me better odds for my four, and then I'd RNGesus the rest. But I'm clarifying this is a "in the absence of any other solid reasoning" deal, plus I do have stronger negative non-trust feelings on some other players, even if I wouldn't say I trust or have warm fuzzy feelings towards most of the three. But I expect the second day to bring about a little more meat, in which case I will expect to correct these initial impressions and to be able to present candidates I am personally more convinced about. Edited to add: Plus, I almost expect El to have worked this out already and to prepare to punish players who reason like this - of course it's a major IKYK against the GM, and if anything, I think it's a point on the paucity of what we have to work with that I'm actually considering this line of reasoning more robust than my reads.]

To be fair, I think I barely have 1k down >>;;; It was a really bad week and I'm writing my NaNo by hand. But I've done the 50k in 5 days before, so in theory I can still catch up and I don't want to give up just yet!

Aranmir sighed. He didn't bother to muffle the sound. The council was shaping up to have a Phellom-Yuriel debate, which was not proving particularly inspiring. Aranmir wanted the council to shift its gaze elsewhere: what did they think of Gwendolyn, or the man in the black hat. What about Ulmo, who had appeared in and seemingly vanished again in a spray of vapour? What of Robin or many of the others who had spoken once and vanished or not at all? Who would the council pick, if they were forced to select all seven Walkers today? Aranmir was neither convinced nor inspired by the arguments thus far, though he did not account himself among the wise. Too, he did not understand the resistance to electing Yuriel to the Fellowship. With several of the council casting votes for Yuriel, further arguments about Yuriel only risked further cementing her as the leading candidate for election, if only so everyone could figure out what was going on. But that was counter to what Phellom appeared to want. Astranwir, too, had vanished entirely. Aranmir wanted to know what had become of the Istar.

Aranmir raised an eyebrow when the elf who had first brought out the Ring put his name forward as one of the candidates for the Fellowship. Certainly, the Ringbearer would need someone who had some measure of skill with the blade, and who knew his way around the wilderness they had to travel, but he knew nothing of the elf at all - Gwendolyn, had that been her name? - and the choice left him with some measure of unease. Yuriel had stepped forward and offered her name for consideration as a candidate, mentioning that she would be busy with personal projects in the near future - possibly the jewelry she was famous for in Imladris - and would like the choice to be over and done with, one way or another. Aranmir supposed she did not expect the council meetings to be over anytime soon. He was not sure about that, though. He knew a little about Yuriel - they had crossed paths on occasion before, but her reputation preceded her. It was said she had found the Ring, a long time ago, before it was lost to the Anduin. Before the Ring, or so Aranmir had been told, had crossed paths with a halfling by the name of Bilbo Baggins, and a group of dwarves seeking to restore a lost throne. It took strength of character to behold the Ring and to give it up. Isildur had proved wanting in that regard. Aranmir had not yet been so tested, and perhaps he feared his own response, a little. "I do not distrust Yuriel," he said, carefully. "All the same, I do not find myself - quite - convinced by her words. I think that I would therefore withhold my nomination from her for the time being." He had considered the man in the black hat, (GoWibble) but something about how the man carried himself did not sit right to Aranmir. He was glad he had held his tongue. There was Phellom, the elf delegate from Mirkwood, who had just gone and tripped over his own feet again. Aranmir did not feel particularly strongly about Phellom, one way or another. However, he distrusted the way the field had narrowed now, and so he sought to cast his net wider. "I believe that I would be of aid to the Ringbearer," Aranmir acknowledged. And yet, it was the suddenness, he supposed, that perturbed him. Or perhaps it was that he had not imagined it happening this way. He had meant to offer his sword to the Ringbearer, not to have it offered for him. They had little basis for trust right now. And too few of them had responded to his overtures. In light of that, Aranmir was not certain that the sudden swing to his own name as a candidate was not an overture from the Shadow. There was one, though, who merely observed. Aranmir turned his gaze to them. "I am not sufficiently convinced enough to cast my nomination," he announced. "It interests me, however, what that one is doing." (xinoehp512) [OOC: I simply am not feeling any of the existing choices or pseudochoices very much right now. Eru, I don't even feel myself, even if I could vote for myself! Consider this a challenge, then, to anyone suitably invested in the lynch. If you can convince me, my vote is yours. Otherwise, I'm just gonna do whatever I want. Which, apparently, means voting the Observer right now. Go figure.]