Amber Vulture

Erm. I don't follow :P.

Scorp has been talking to Penguin, I'm pretty sure edit: Wonder if this is some roundabout way of distancing

I've thought about this. Embedding encrypted messages, placing other uniquely personalized media in my posts, etc. But of course, going the extra mile to make a possible conversion detectable is not in my best interests since my loyalties inevitably shift in that event. (If I had more time to dedicate to this game, I probably would have done it anyway, if only to make the kandra's life harder than it needs to be.) Instead of working on making oneself conversion-proof, the better course of action here is probably to monitor the thread and look for abnormalities following the death of a kandra. It's possible there are no kandra at all - given how the main mechanic in MR57 failed to go off at all, it won't surprise me to find out the kandra don't exist. Or maybe they won't choose to use the mimicry. But enough about the conversion mechanic - shouldn't really be relevant until a kandra flips. But I encourage everyone to post as much as their schedules allow them to - let's not give them an easy conversion target. And I shouldn't have to say this but please do not role claim in PMs/in-thread. They inherit the role of the player they mimic, so we have to practice caution. I agree with Penguin that Scorp not checking the playerlist is odd - why ping the player and ask if the account is currently active instead of simply checking the playerlist? It's a redundant question - not like the account will respond if they aren't playing. This comes off as feigning nonchalance. Conversely, I also agree with Scorp that Penguin voting for Weasel after expressing suspicion on Scorp is weird.

Cycle Post Player Summary Vote Retractions Thoughts AI (perceived) Notable connections Aftermath 1426 Salmon Meerkat Meme suggesting Charocal Hyena, Salmon Meerkat, Mauve Crocodile, Amber Vulture, Emerald Falcon, Violet Axolotl made limited effort to maintain anonymity. Draws parallel with AG7 N/A N/A Odd to suggest Amber Vulture easily identifiable. Clearly unsupported assertion. Moderate evil little wilson, Kal Dell

The post is to find a potential rioter, yes. I disagree that it doesn't solve alignments, however - it tells us (and I'd welcome challenge to the logic used) that the rioter is both seeking to hide their identity and has been coordinated enough to do so since D1, and further identifies that the rioter sought to save you over Turquoise Gorilla. I think, particularly in the context of Hyena's claim about you, that such an analysis makes a strong claim about alignments. If you disagree with anything about how I worked through the vote manipulation logic I'll happily rethink it through. I think calling the post eliminator alignment indicative because it doesn't solve alignments feels like you're ignoring the substance of the post itself. On D1 I reached out to you to ask about why you claimed PMs existed with Crocodile and Swan. You replied that you wanted to see what they'd do, and asked why I asked in a PM. I replied that I had thought it might be some sort of gambit you'd prefer not to talk about in thread, and you in turn replied you'd talk openly about anything you choose to do in thread if asked. I then moved on to the next post in my analysis, and didn't have a further question for you.

You may very well, but as I say above, I do not get a sense from your reply to Fuchsia that you were engaging with the substance of their point. As their point happens to be my point, I wanted to make that explicit. I look forward to your responses to what I've raised, and particularly to your thoughts on why a spiked rioter would seek to keep Emerald Falcon alive.

The accusation is derived from my own. Without going back and relooking at the post, my recollection is that it felt uncharacteristically toothless of you. That you subsequently ignored the post of Turquoise Gorilla about their suspicion of Albatross making the absurdly illogical claim about village/elim thug equiprobability without challenge, despite posting straight afterwards and being in the mindset of thinking about Turquoise Gorilla added to my suspicion. See posts 332-348 for the sequence here: On top of this, we have: 1) Last cycle; 2) The mentions of an elim soother throughout consideration of the D1 lynch, which my paranoia says is trying to dissuade people considering the rioter/smoker combination I believe I've shown; 3) Trying to bait out a village rioter claim in #264; 4) You having made a claim about Emerald Falcon, and the spiked rioter activity last cycle seeking to avoid an Emerald Falcon flip. I think the sum of all of this is enough to make me believe you to be more likely spiked than not. We can talk about specifics, but I think debate of the sort you're trying to engage Ostrich in ignores that looking at the totality of a post (in this case your ISO), and what it achieves, is a fair way to come to a conclusion.

The riot from a player already voting on Turquoise Gorilla takes a vote from Emerald Falcon, dropping them from four to three, but is net neutral on Turquoise Gorilla, as the rioter's vote is cancelled by the riot. It is the absence of a vote being lost from the second riot that allows us to draw the conclusions about the non-voting/smoked rioter.

A quick look at vote manipulation over the last three cycles: D1: Vote Count Mauve Crocodile (4): <4> Emerald Falcon, Fuchsia Ostrich, Onyx Flamingo, Saffron Iguana Saffron Iguana (3): <4> Magenta Albatross, Mauve Crocodile, Pearl Chameleon, Turquoise Gorilla Turquoise Gorilla (3): <4> Amethyst Scorpion, Coral Swan, Scarlet Octopus, Violet Axolotl Charcoal Hyena (2): <2> Chartreuse Penguin, Salmon Meerkat Amethyst Scorpion (1): <1> Charcoal Hyena Coral Swan (1): <1> Oxblood Beagle Violet Axolotl (1): <1> Mint Heron We know one vote on Saffron Iguana ought to disappear, by virtue of their being soothed, leaving one unknown vote removal. I think we can all agree that it is a safe assumption that this vote removal on Turquoise Gorilla is eliminator in nature. Options: 1) A vote on Turquoise Gorilla was soothed 2) A vote on Turquoise Gorilla was rioted to no vote, with the rioter smoked 3) A voter on Turquoise Gorilla rioted the same vote that was soothed (presumably intending to move a vote from Saffron Iguana to Mauve Crocodile). 4) A vote on Turquoise Gorilla was rioted to no vote, and the rioter was either soothed themselves, or didn't vote. Our list of non voters is as follows: Amber Vulture Azure Mouse Ivory Dragonfly Melon Dingo Opal Lion Plum Rhinoceros Quartz Zebra Sapphire Elephant Sunburst Toucan Of this list, I can rule out Amber Vulture, Opal Lion, and Sunburst Toucan being the rioter, leaving us with: Azure Mouse Ivory Dragonfly Melon Dingo Plum Rhinoceros Quartz Zebra Sapphire Elephant D2: Vote Count: Saffron Iguana (5): <4> Azure Mouse, Charcoal Hyena, Emerald Falcon, Onyx Flamingo, Pearl Chameleon, Salmon Meerkat Scarlet Octopus (4): Chartreuse Penguin, Coral Swan, Oxblood Beagle, Saffron Iguana Onyx Flamingo (2): Fuchsia Ostrich, Mint Heron Amethyst Scorpion (1): Turquoise Gorilla Magenta Albatross (1): Amber Vulture Pearl Chameleon (1): Violet Axolotl Turquoise Gorilla (1): Amethyst Scorpion The only visible vote manipulation is the removal of a vote on Saffron Iguana. D3: Vote Count Turquoise Gorilla (9): <8> Amethyst Scorpion, Coral Swan, Emerald Falcon, Fuchsia Ostrich, Magenta Albatross, Onyx Flamingo, Quartz Zebra, Salmon Meerkat Emerald Falcon (2): <4> Amber Vulture, Oxblood Beagle, Pearl Chameleon, Plum Rhinoceros Fuchsia Ostrich (1): Mint Heron Oxblood Beagle (1): Chartreuse Penguin Pearl Chameleon (1): Violet Axolotl Quartz Zebra (1): Charcoal Hyena We know we have one vote missing on Turquoise Gorilla, and two missing on Emerald Falcon. I am in the privileged position of knowing that a player voting on Turquoise Gorilla rioted Plum Rhinoceros onto Turquoise Gorilla. As such, we would expect the vote count to look as follows: Turquoise Gorilla (8): <8> Amethyst Scorpion, Coral Swan, Emerald Falcon, Fuchsia Ostrich, Magenta Albatross, Onyx Flamingo, Quartz Zebra, Salmon Meerkat Emerald Falcon (3): <4> Amber Vulture, Oxblood Beagle, Pearl Chameleon, Plum Rhinoceros Fuchsia Ostrich (1): Mint Heron Oxblood Beagle (1): Chartreuse Penguin Pearl Chameleon (1): Violet Axolotl Quartz Zebra (1): Charcoal Hyena As such, there must have been a rioter moving a vote onto Turquoise Gorilla, as we have (unlike D1) an additional vote to account for. We must further explain the additional vote missing on Emerald Falcon. Where did the additional vote come from? As per the rules clarifications, you cannot riot a no-vote to a vote. Given this, the vote must have been removed from amongst the votes on Emerald Falcon. Plum Rhinoceros was already rioted onto Turquoise Gorilla, so one of Amber Vulture, Oxblood Beagle, and Pearl Chameleon must have been moved. However, moving a vote from Emerald Falcon onto Turquoise Gorilla, along with the already moved vote of Plum Rhinoceros, satisfies our missing votes, fully explaining the vote changes. Unexplained still is what happened to the vote of the rioter. If the rioter was a player voting on e.g. Emerald Falcon, we would see a vote count of 9-1, not 9-2. As such, we have either 1) The rioter did not vote, or 2) the rioter was smoked, and so could move a vote without their own disappearing. Let's look at both these options: 1) A rioter not voting but moving a vote. Let us consider the non-voters: Azure Mouse Ivory Dragonfly Melon Dingo Sapphire Elephant Turquoise Gorilla Of these, we can obviously rule out Turquoise Gorilla being the rioter, leaving us with: Azure Mouse Ivory Dragonfly Melon Dingo Sapphire Elephant None of these players voted D1 either, and all are minimally active. It is possible that any of these players could be responsible for our riot, but we are then committed to a player both not being active enough to vote, but also being active enough to move a vote in two rounds, first from an eliminator, and second from Emerald Falcon onto the very same player they removed a vote from in D1. If that is the case, I think it confirms our inactive rioter is an eliminator, as I can't see a village explanation for that behaviour, but more generally I think that overall it seems highly unlikely. The other option is that the rioter was smoked, and moved a vote from Emerald Falcon onto Turquoise Gorilla. I cannot see a world in which a village rioter coordinated with a village smoker on D1, and frankly think it highly unlikely that that would be happening on D3 as well (and if it happened on D3 but not D1, we are dealing with two different rioters, both hiding the vote removal through different means - I think highly unlikely on balance). As such, I think we can conclude further that the rioter is an eliminator in this scenario as well. However, I think the smoked rioter can (in theory) be any player other than Salmon Meerkat (confirmed tineye), Magenta Albatross (assuming they are a thug), and Plum Rhinoceros, whose vote was moved. The question becomes why would an eliminator rioter want to move a vote from Emerald Falcon to Turquoise Gorilla? In a PM, to Salmon Meerkat, Charcoal Hyena claimed Emerald Falcon had been scanned as villager (a claim they make in a slightly more oblique way in thread), and Emerald Falcon confirmed in that PM that Charcoal Hyena had his role right - surely they would want to move a vote the other way, to increase the chance of lynching a supposedly cleared player? This, I think, is strong evidence for my theory of elim!Falcon, and therefore elim!Hyena - Falcon flipping eliminator brings down Hyena as well, and therefore is a greater loss to their team.

Your initial vote on Mauve Crocodile was made after claiming to have looked at PMs which didn’t exist, and you were challenged on why you read them as evil. I can see an entirely reasonable motivation being to justify your (previously unjustified) vote - had Mauve flipped village and you hadn’t given a strong reason for believing them evil, I think that could have lead to scrutiny harder to wave off than just being wrong in your analysis.

Setting aside the ISO, I’d appreciate explanations on your part primarily of what you got out of the false PM claims and the coinshot claim, and secondarily why you made them? I’ll think further on the ISO, although maintain that there are things you’ve attributed to Mauve that were misinterpretations of what they said, which doesn’t feel like a genuine attempt to consider them to me. That matters more to me than the timing of it.

I’m not sure I agree - I see posting the ISO as a justification for the vote already made, giving them cover for the flip as just being wrong, but having good reason for the beliefs. My challenge to is is that I don’t see the ISO as genuine

I had wanted to get further with this, and to write up thoughts on all players, but a crisis in my personal life has severely limited my time, so I'm going to pause my post by post analysis here, and look at what I've got so far on Emerald Falcon and Turquoise Gorilla. I'm going to post the analysis in full (up to mid D2) for anyone who wants to look at it, and then extract the relevant parts for this particular discussion. Full analysis (WIP): Emerald Falcon: Emerald Falcon's playstyle is one I find extremely difficult to analyse. There are a few strands to my thoughts on Emerald Falcon. The first of these, which I've referenced before, is their ISO of Mauve Crocodile (#204), which they claim in #255 was an attempt to find something villagery in Mauve Crocodile's posts. I encourage everyone to read this again, knowing Mauve Crocodile was a villager. I can call out a couple of points where I think they have dismissed without due consideration Mauve Crocodile's points (1 - the 1/2 villager point for Turquoise Gorilla is, wasn't unreasonable - I think Mauve Crocodile was right that the coinshot and misborn are nothing alike in potential for the spiked, and would have said it more likely that a villager than eliminator conflated the two, and 2 - their dismissal of [2] without looking at the context, which was a reply to Saffron Iguana, who has made a point about the number of coinshot kills proving a theory (see here), but more generally, the post itself reads to me like a lynch manifesto, rather than an attempt to solve their alignment. In #255, they claim they couldn't find a single villagery thing in Mauve Crocodile's posts. Coral Swan made the point well, I think, when they said they think Emerald Falcon could have found at least something villagery, since it came from a villager. Beyond the ISO, which is a major part of my suspicion, we have the inconsistencies and oddities in posts, throughout the game. 1) Reads on Coral Swan yoyo nearly post by post (#266 (not suspicious)), (#304 (votes on Coral Swan), (#314 (has Coral Swan as a top village read), (#346 (everything Coral Swan does makes them want to suspect them). 2) The non-existent PMs with Mauve Crocodile and Coral Swan, (also used as initial justification for the vote on Mauve Crocodile) 3) Claiming a coinshot contacted them There may well be a reason for 2 and 3 from Emerald Falcon - phishing for responses, but the nature and immediately falsifiable nature of the first claim has me wondering what they were actually looking for - I'd ask Emerald Falcon what information they learned from responses to these, particularly? I think in general, it feels like they are deliberately causing confusion, and unless they are getting a lot of information back from it, don't see the village argument for doing so. Perhaps more of my eliminator read of Emerald Falcon is built on gut than I'd like, but I can't shake it, and would like a response on the inconsistencies. Turquoise Gorilla: Cycle Post Player Summary Vote Retractions Thoughts AI (perceived) Notable connections D1 8 Turquoise Gorilla RP. Proposes we discuss village to eliminator distribution. N/A N/A Unhelpful formatting. Seeks to spark discussion, well trodden ground for early discussion, of limited value (but not much else of value to discuss) NAI None D1 14 Turquoise Gorilla Non-RP post. Believes 6-7 spiked. Suggests eliminator kill role (coinshot/mistborn) N/A N/A Disagree with spiked assumption, probably NAI. Village slip considering coinshot/mistborn equivalent for spiked? Mild village None D1 49 Turquoise Gorilla Quotes player distribution discussion. Says thinks 25% the sweet spot for eliminator numbers, so 6-7 eliminator team N/A N/A Doesn't engage with vote discussion Very mild elim Quotes team distribution discussion, doesn't engage with posts directly D1 118 Turquoise Gorilla Notes typo in Pearl Chameleon's post N/A N/A Doesn't engage with vote discussion, even though centred on themselves Unsure None D1 157 Turquoise Gorilla Asks for a vote count N/A N/A Not engaging with thread enough to find last one and work it out. Not trying to solve game? Very mild evil None D1 160 Turquoise Gorilla Votes on Coral Swan. Reads them null, possibly mildly elim, but doesn't see reason for other trains. Says Pearl Chameleon and Mauve Crocodile both seem village in PMs, doesn't see reason for voting on Charcoal Hyena Coral Swan N/A Four hours left in cycle, not strictly necessary to vote on one of those four, given low vote threshold. Feels like wants to lynch someone, doesn't need a good reason to. Mild evil Votes Coral Swan - not on a team with them, as threatens lynch. Defends Pearl Chameleon and Mauve Crocodile. D1 163 Turquoise Gorilla Says their vote on Coral Swan is because it is too late to start a lynch train, and that they are gut reading Coral Swan as mild elim N/A N/A At least consistent with actions. Poor reason for vote, but prepared to vote and be seen to do so on gut Very mild gut evil Explains vote on Coral Swan D1 193 Turquoise Gorilla Provides updated vote count, in which they are leading N/A N/A Relaxed about outcome? Seems slightly nonchalant Mild evil None D1 213 Turquoise Gorilla Doesn't want to see Mauve Crocodile or themselves lynched, so votes for Saffron Iguana, despite null read Saffron Iguana Coral Swan Four minutes to end of cycle, consistent with self preservation. Announces trust of Mauve Crocodile before they get lynched - seeking village cred? NAI, gut mild village Declared wish to keep Mauve Crocodile alive, voted to lynch Saffron Iguana N1 226 Turquoise Gorilla Joking RP post about lynch N/A N/A Surely something more substantial to say? Unsure None N1 259 Turquoise Gorilla Lacking motivation to post. Thinks manipulation all eliminators. Thinks as borne suspicion that eliminators had a motive to keep both Saffron Iguana and them alive N/A N/A Preparing excuse for manipulation after elim soother flip? Very mild evil None N1 262 Turquoise Gorilla Asks Emerald Falcon what they mean N/A N/A NAI NAI None D2 337 Turquoise Gorilla Would have voted for Albatross, as thinks survival more likely if an eliminator. Could be villlaghe thug, or elim thug, but if lurched then more likely elim. Equally likely v!thug and e!thug, but lurched more likely elim so votes on Magenta Albatross Magenta Albatross N/A Very poor logic. More likely village than elim, being thug equally likely, so still more likely village than elim. Moderate evil Votes on Magenta Albatross D2 340 Turquoise Gorilla Put weird explanatory stuff in the post because people attacking them for lack of analysis. Voted on Magenta Albatross because they think it's more likely they survived if they're an eliminator N/A N/A Even if one more scenario where they survive if an eliminator, much more likely to be villager in first place - not properly updating beliefs Elim None D2 345 Turquoise Gorilla Says they don't have motivation to make thought out reads, so thinks someone is suspicious, and builds other suspicions around that N/A N/A Feels like rationalisation Mild evil None D2 348 Turquoise Gorilla RP post N/A N/A Not engaging NAI None As with Emerald Falcon, I have thoughts alongside each of their posts. I think the argument for Turquoise Gorilla for me is tripartite. Firstly, we have their interactions with Salmon Meerkat. Salmon Meerkat has made this case more compellingly than I can, but I do not feel like the timings add up with their implied knowledge. More importantly, to me, is the vote on Magenta Albatross. The logic used here is extremely flawed - that either a village or an eliminator could be a thug, but an eliminator is more likely to be lurched, so Magenta being an eliminator is more likely. A thug being a villager or an eliminator is not equiprobable - indeed, I would hazard that any given villager is multiple times more likely to be a villager than an eliminator (and being hit by a coinshot doesn't alter the prior probability of their being a villager nearly enough to overcome this, even if an eliminator was more likely to be hit). I read this pretty strongly as an eliminator wanting to jump on Magenta Albatross as a lynch target, building on growing thread pressure on them, and not caring for the validity of the reasoning used to do so. Finally, I think it worth noting their nonchalance when they lead the lynch on D1. I read from this that it's extremely likely that they knew they would be soothed on D1, and think it very possible that this was done by a teammate (my gut tells me to look at D1 voters on them for a spiked, knowing of the soothing and seeking distancing should Turquoise eventually flip). I'm happy with either lynch, and don't think they're not necessarily E/E on the block. I'll vote on Emerald Falcon, but will keep an eye on the thread until I fall asleep. Going forward, I intend to catch my close analysis up to the end of D2, and try to re-engage with the thread in the present.

Apologies for the wording here - you're right that Magenta Albatross never explicitly claims to be a new player. As I noted above, however, I think their claimed absence of knowledge of what role madness is, and their claim that they hadn't considered why eliminators might seek role claims in PMs, are both implicit claims of newness to the game. Beyond this, of lesser relevance, I have notes on both Charcoal Hyena and Amethyst Scorpion discussing them as new, and so infer that Magenta Albatross was likely aware that this perception existed, but chose not to address it.

Much appreciated. I'll think further on this, but still see both contradictions within their posts, and between how they act and their claim to be a new player, irrespective of whether they have played a previous anonymous game.

Pending further analysis, I expect I'll place my vote on Saffron Iguana, as per my post during the night cycle. I intend to look more closely at @Emerald Falcon, primarily for their analysis on Mauve Crocodile, which I found to read more like a lynch manifesto than an attempt to examine their actions, but also because I'd still like to understand whatever was going on with their claim of non-existent PMs with Mauve Crocodile and Coral Swan. I think of relevance to both, (and to consideration of whether they were attacked by a village or an eliminator coinshot) is an analysis of Magenta Albatross. As before, I attach my D1 notes on them: Cycle Post Summary Vote Retractions Thoughts AI (perceived) Notable connections D1 4 Says "looked differently in a past life". Replies to Saffron Iguana, suggesting that if LG74 distro holds, perhaps no village seekers. N/A N/A Played at least one anon game before. Engaging with assumption of LG74 distribution without questioning it - why? NAI Reply to Saffron Iguana D1 10 RP. Asks what rules mean by role madness. Gives self answer - that not everyone has a role. Suggests regardless that all spiked have a role. N/A N/A Genuine question? Why assumption of spiked roles? Inexperience, or desire to appear so? Unsure None D1 73 Replies to Saffron Iguana. Admits to having asked players for roles in PMs. Provides updated vote counts. Suggests they have mild village reads on those who didn't want to role trade in PMs. Says they don't know who to vote for N/A N/A I think acknowledging having been phishing is NAI. Possibly leaning elim - felt better to come into open about it first? Clearly engaged with game if Pming, doesn't give reads from PMs despite claiming they have them. Dislike their reluctance to vote. Mild evil Replies to Saffron Iguana, claims to have PMd multiple players D1 206 Provides vote count, votes on Saffron Iguana, tying them with Turquoise Gorilla and Mauve Crocodile. Notes Saffron Iguana could self save. Thinks tie will produce information Saffron Iguana N/A Unlikely to be on a team with Saffron Iguana or Turquoise Gorilla. Village vibes from information reasoning of the vote Mild village Votes for Saffron Iguana D1 210 Says they commented on Saffron Iguana in particular because they voted on Saffron Iguana N/A N/A Fair enough NAI None D1 216 Asks Saffron Iguana why they didn't vote to save themselves, edits it following second Iguana post N/A N/A None NAI Replies to Saffron Iguana Magenta Albatross has a couple of posts I want to draw attention to. As has been raised, there is the attempt to seem a newer player (#10, the question on role madness). I think there are three explanations for this: 1) Magenta Albatross is an eliminator, and wants to be seen as a new, inexperienced player; 2) Magenta Albatross is a villager, but wants to be seen as a new, inexperienced player; 3) Magenta Albatross genuinely doesn't know what role madness is. Addressing these in reverse: 3) As per D1 #4, Magenta Albatross has played at least one anonymous game before, along with LG74, with which they seem familiar. They are further comfortable enough with the concept of PM role trading to do so, and claims they want to tie the vote to produce information. I haven't been around the community recently, so don't know how often the term "role madness" is used presently, but it was a fairly basic part of the lexicon when I did play regularly. Whilst I'm willing to re-evaluate this should I be wrong about the frequency of the use of this term, I think this explanation is unlikely - it seems obvious to me that Magenta Albatross is not a new player. 2) I do not think we can entirely dismiss this out of hand, as I can see a villager wanting to take advantage of an anonymous game to play the game in a different way 1) Is the most likely explanation, I think. The advantages of being seen as inexperienced need not be restated. Post #73 (here) gives me the largest reason to suspect they are an eliminator. In this post, they claim "they weren't thinking of telling people their role as letting the elims play minesweeper to find their key targets", reinforcing the claim of being a new player. I find it odd that they go on to ascribe village reads to the people they PMd for not engaging in role trading - claiming a village feeling on the grounds of an idea they claim to have just encountered feels wrong to me. I also find it odd that, despite claiming village reads, they don't give the identities of the players within this nebulous claim. I would further note the last part of their post: "I really don't have any ideas on who to vote for, I just know we'll need someone to have several more votes than the others to try to avoid vote manip but we still have a while before that really matters so I won't jump on anything yet." This feels like an attempt to avoid having to give an opinion. Beyond this, I find the conviction that we should be trying to avoid vote manipulation deciding the lynch odd, and encouraging of a band wagon approach to this lynch. It is particularly odd to me in light of their actions in post #206, here. In this post, they vote on Saffron Iguana, creating a three way tie, which they declare is interesting. Notable, they say "Vote manip could also shake things up and provide information or not", which is both an opinion I would not expect to see from a new player, and directly contradicts their earlier stated view. I think I am largely convinced they are not a new player, and between #76 and #206 feel it more likely that they are an eliminator than a villager wanting the novelty of a different playstyle. An eliminator Magenta Albatross has implications both on last cycle's final vote distribution, and I think on Saffron Iguana's own alignment. As such, despite my view beginning this analysis, I'm going to vote on Magenta Albatross

I'm glad that Charcoal Hyena has brought up Saffron Iguana - I want to focus on them first, as they raised my own hackles when going through the thread. I'm going to copy paste my notes on them in first, to use as a reference point for my thoughts: Cycle Post Summary Vote Retractions Thoughts AI (perceived) Notable connections D1 3 Gives LG74 distribution. Draws spiked ratio from this. Suggests village distribution similar. N/A N/A Odd to assume distribution similar. Player of limited experience? Agree re spiked number. NAI None D1 7 Suggests LG74 as baseline because up to date with meta. Draws from this that 2/3rds have roles. Suggests spiked one of each role. N/A N/A Disagree with assumption. Plenty of prior meta, GMs have wealth of experience. Anon game meta also differs. Possibility of role? Spiked having one of each role vastly overpowered - see coinshot. Possible deliberate comment if evil, likely village not considering power Mild village Reply to Coral Swan D1 11 Replies to Pearl Chameleon (who voted on them). Doesn't engage with vote. Asks why Pearl Chameleon describes seeker as power role for spiked N/A N/A Either attempt to seem village, or genuine village thought process. Seeker of great value to spiked in identifying village power roles to kill, and to claim village seeker & build fake trust circle. Nai on not engaging with vote Mild village Replies to Pearl Chameleon, doesn't engage with vote D1 21 Suggests Fuchsia Ostrich bold to assume that GMS didn't take LG74 as a challenge. Replies to Scarlet Octopus Suggests equivalence of v!lurchers to e!seekers. Limited value due to size of group N/A N/A Stranger to assume GMs did take strange game as challenge. Not sure I follow equivalence. NAI Disagrees with Fuchsia Ostrich, replies to Scarlet Octopus D1 45 Thanks Charcoal Hyena for reads list. Notes contract between Pearl Chameleon's earlier strong argument and more recent retraction. Thinks a villager would be more likely to not change views under pressure. Replies to Amethyst Scorpion, says theory on elim coinshots being too strong will be tested soon enough, assuming "our coinshot" chooses to shoot tonight. Explains belief in equivalence between v!lurcher and e!seeker as both being a role stronger for other team. Rates elim vote manipulators as limited power N/A N/A Agree re views on pearl Chameleon's actions - feels genuine. Request explanation for what they meant by theory being tested soon enough - why would village coinshot prove elim coinshot as too powerful? Mild village Replies to Charcoal Hyena, Pearl Chameleon, Melon Dingo, Salmon Meerkat, Amethyst Scorpion, Mauve Crocodile. Expresses elim view of Pearl Chameleon D1 63 Replies to Salmon Meerkat spotting absence of spiked seeker from power list, doesn't give explanation. Says value would be after smokers. Agrees with Violet Axolotl that Turquoise Gorilla not being helpful. N/A N/A Query reason for omission. Agree with view on Turquoise Gorilla's actions. NAI Supports Violet Axolotl's view on Turquoise Gorilla D1 71 Responds to Mauve Crocodile's query of their thoughts on N1 revealing an elim coinshot. Assumes any coinshot will shoot tonight, except hesitant village on. If three kills, probably eliminator coinshot. Responds to Amber Vulture, says Scarlet Octopus just pessimistic N/A N/A Not sure I buy the logic here - they themselves acknowledge complications. Suggest speculating on impact of night rurn on distribution better done as post hoc analysis. Gut mild evil Responds to Mauve Crocodile, Amber Vulture, defends Scarlet Octopus D1 83 Calls out Magenta Albatross for hedging their views. Says they received PMs from Amethyst Scorpion and Magenta Albatross N/A N/A Agree with calling out of Magenta Albatross NAI Calls out Magenta Albatross D1 107 Reads Charcoal Hyena as potentially part of eliminator team, abstaining from voting in case spiked lynch target of Chameleon changes. Suspects Spiked have a plan to move those votes. N/A N/A Post only makes sense if believes spiked votes already on Pearl Chameleon. Not likely to be on eliminator team with Charcoal Hyena. No current vote - if they hold this belief, why no vote? Probe, potentially moderate evil Has gut evil read on Charcoal Hyena. Suggests spiked want to lynch Pearl Chameleon. D1 123 Says two votes low enough for outcome to change, would rather Pearl Chameleon voted on them than in self preservation at this point in cycle. Effort clears Salmon Meerkat and Amber Vulture N/A N/A Doesn't feel in danger of lynch. Agree that pre-emptive to vote in self preservation. Disagree with effort clearing - I've done this before a number of times whilst evil. Willingness to effort clear cycle one makes me wary. Very mild evil Thinks Salmon Meerkat and Amber Vulture village D1 186 Respects commitment of Pearl Chameleon to read of Saffron Iguana. Replies to Mauve Crocodile, says has been giving commentary as they go, just hasn't consolidated it yet. Thinks amount of Octopus Rp posts makes them suspicious. Thinks possibility of elim tineye to give village choice of whether to kill suspicious player but shut dowen Pms or do reverse N/A N/A Not that many RP posts from Scarlet Octopus - odd player to single out for it. Still no vote, despite lynch building against them. Relaxed as to outcome of lynch due to vote manipulation? Reevaluate Suspicious of Scarlet Octopus D1 200 Replies to Emerald Falcon. Says sees any post not containing the another player as NAI .Thinks Spiked would prefer predictable lynch to random one meaning one of their own might be lynched. Thinks Pearl Chameleon was this lynch N/A N/A Many of their own posts therefore NAI - thus not helpful in contributing to meaningful discussion. Interesting to ntoe view on pearl Chameleon. Unsure Village read on Pearl Chameleon D1 212 Replies to Magenta Albatross' vote on them, votes for Magenta Albatross Magenta Albatross N/A At this point still tied, and feels relaxed. Planning to change vote, or confident of vote manipulation? Mild evil Votes for Magenta Albatross D1 214 Replies to Turquoise Gorilla, suggests compromise vote on Mauve Crocodile, votes for Mauve Crocodile Mauve Crocodile Magenta Albatross Has not expressed any suspicion of Mauve Crocodile, but now leading lynch. Why Mauve Crocodile over Turquoise Gorilla? Self-preservation likely NAI Votes for Mauve Crocodile I've tried articulating a summary of my thoughts several times, and am struggling to convey myself in a way I'm pleased with, so am going to put my thoughts down as they come and hope they make some sense. 1) I think part of my gut worry about Saffron Iguana comes down to the downplaying of the power of an eliminator seeker, or omitting it entirely from a power list (#11, #21). I was initially worried this was due to the presence of an eliminator seeker whose manipulative ability the spiked wished to downplay. I have since been informed that LG74 featured two eliminator seekers. An eliminator seeker is still possible, but given #3, Saffron Iguana is intimately familiar with the LG74 distribution, and so seems less likely to seek to downplay their strength (although I don't know whether the manipulative potential of eliminator seekers was used in LG74). 2) Effort clearing Salmon Meerkat and myself. Whilst I read Salmon Meerkat as firmly village, the effort clearing of me took place after I had posted a single notes post. I don't think clearing me at that point was justifiable based on my actions - and so am wary that it was either pocketing, or because elim!Saffron Iguana knew my alignment regardless. 3) Throughout the cycle, Saffron Iguana seems entirely nonchalant about their chances of being lynched. Initially, they simply don't engage with Pearl Chameleon's vote on them. I didn't dwell on this beyond noting it at the time, but from a critical viewpoint could see this as not wanting to defend themselves and trip up. (Very weak argument here, I acknowledge). Of greater not to me is their relaxed nature to the later votes, which suggest to me awareness of vote manipulation being available, or that they have teammates they know will ensure they don't lead the lynch (or both). I think this nonchalance contributes significantly to my gut read of Saffron Iguana. 4) I think this post (#107) doesn't make sense unless Saffron Iguana believed there were extant eliminator votes on Pearl Chameleon (the votes on Pearl Chameleon at that time were Scarlet Octopus, and Mauve Crocodile). Saffron Iguana does, later (#186) say they find Scarlet Octopus suspicious, but gives an entirely unrelated reason - the number of RP posts. If Saffron Iguana did believe there were eliminator votes on Pearl Chameleon, why didn't they vote on that belief at the time? They reiterate this view at post #200, here, yet again do not pursue this belief to the logical conclusion of scrutinising the voters on Pearl Chameleon. I remain frustrated with how I've articulated this, but would rather start getting my thoughts out there and move on.

Apologies for my absence in the second half of the cycle. The nature of how I've gone about thinking about this game meant I wanted to be caught up, and that took a serious amount of time. Following the slight disaster of my last post's formatting, I'm going to try to use spoiler boxes and smaller tables within them. Apologies again if this doesn't work. I intend to get back to this later on tonight, and synthesise my views, but due to time constraints think it is plausible that I don't have time to do this tonight, and want to get my thoughts (at least in their present state) on record before the end of the cycle. As such: Amethyst Scorpion Charcoal Hyena: Chartreuse Penguin: Coral Swan: Emerald Falcon: Fuchsia Ostrich: Ivory Dragonfly: Magenta Albatross: Mauve Crocodile: Melon Dingo: Mint Heron: Onyx Flamingo: Opal Lion: Oxblood Beagle: Pearl Chameleon: Quartz Zebra: Saffron Iguana: Salmon Meerkat: Scarlet Octopus: Turquoise Gorilla: Violet Axolotl:

I’ve not been able to keep up with the conversation post page four well enough to offer meaningful thoughts, beyond wanting to see someone who has either engaged in significant discussion, or been discussed at length, lynched. We’ve generated a lot of views on these players, and I think it would be of much more use to validate (or otherwise) some of them than to change the lynch to one that gives us no new information. Apologies for the lack of summation in my earlier post - I haven’t got to the point of drawing my own conclusions yet. As promised earlier, Scarlet Octopus.

I was hoping to get this to the end of the thread, but I've spent far too much time on this today already, so to the end of page four will have to suffice. I will return to thinking about it this evening, and summate my thoughts (and unquestionably move my vote), but my analysis of the thread so far can be seen below. Pre-emptive apologies for formatting. I've been taught how to get grid lines here, but for the life of me just cannot recall how. Edit: looks like I've broken the site's formatting. Reposting without cycle and post numbers so it keeps more of it on the screen: Player Summary Vote Retractions Thoughts AI Notable connections Elbereth Writeup GM GM GM GM Elbereth Admin GM GM GM GM Saffron Iguana Gives LG74 distribution. Draws spiked ratio from this. Suggets village distribution similar. N/A N/A Odd to assume distribution similar. Player of limited experience? Agree re spiked number. NAI None Magenta Albatross Says "looked differently in a past life". Replies to Saffron Iguana, suggesting that if LG74 distro holds, perhaps no village seekers. N/A N/A Played at least one anon game before. Engaging with assumption of LG74 distribution without questioning it - why? NAI Reply to Saffron Iguana Elbereth Admin GM GM GM GM Coral Swan RP. Agrees with assumption of 5-6 spiked. Doesn't agree with assumption of LG74 distribution. Expects a village seeker N/A N/A Makes sensible statements. Noithing controversial or alignment indicative NAI Refutes assumptions of Saffron Iguana and Magenta Albatross Saffron Iguana Suggests LG74 as baseline because up to date with meta. Draws from this that 2/3rds have roles. Suggests spiked one of each role. N/A N/A Disagree with assumption. Plenty of prior meta, GMs have wealth of experience. Anon game meta also differs. Possibility of role? Spiked having one of each role vastly overpowered - see coinshot. Possible deliberate comment if evil, likely village not considering power Mild village Reply to Coral Swan Turquoise Gorilla RP. Proposes we discuss village to eliminator distribution. N/A N/A Unhelpful formatting. Seeks to spark discussion, well trodden ground for early discussion, of limited value (but not much else of value to discuss) NAI None Pearl Chameleon Suggests coinshots should be initially cautious, as odds of hitting spiked increase as game goes on. Suggests five spiked, six if role balance weak for team. Places vote on Saffron Iguana for relying on LG74 distribution. Saffron Igunana N/A Sensible, well reasoned post. I've always been more in favour of thought out vigilante kills, but C1 probably does have too little information to go on. Vote on Saffron Iguana the obvious vote, but voting on largely NAI material NAI Disagrees with Saffron Iguana, votes on them Magenta Albatross RP. Asks what rules mean by role madness. Gives self answer - that not everyone has a role. Suggests regardless that all spiked have a role. N/A N/A Genuine question? Why assumption of spiked roles? Inexperience, or desire to appear so? Unsure None Saffron Iguana Replies to Pearl Chameleon (who voted on them). Doesn't engage with vote. Asks why Pearl Chameleon describes seeker as power role for spiked N/A N/A Either attempt to seem village, or genuine village thought process. Seeker of great value to spiked in identifying village power roles to kill, and to claim village seeker & build fake trust circle. Nai on not engaging with vote Mild village Replies to Pearl Chameleon, doesn't engage with vote Elbereth Clarifies role madness GM GM GM GM Scarlet Octopus RP. Suggests 6.5 eliminators, rounded to 7. Makes assumption about village distribution. Doesn't think eliminator tineye. Discounts eliminator seeker. Firmly discounts eliminator coinshot. Questions Pearl Chameleon's guess of five eliminators. Questions confidence of Pearl Chameleon in their confidence of role distribution, questions spiked seeker, calling it weak. Votes on Pearl Chameleon Pearl Chameleon N/A Disagree strongly re number of eliminators - much too high. Dislike discounting of eliminator seeker. Gut concern that elim seeker on team. If flips spiked, reconsider this strongly. Mild evil Disagrees with Pearl Chameleon, votes on them Turquoise Gorilla Non-RP post. Believes 6-7 spiked. Suggests eliminator kill role (coinshot/mistborn) N/A N/A Disagree with spiked assumption, probably NAI. Village slip considering coinshot/mistborn equivalent for spiked? Mild village None Coral Swan Responds to Saffron Iguana's reasoning for LG74 baseline. Suspects elims do not have all roles. Responds to Pearl Chameleon vote on Saffron Iguana, says they considered it. Suggests content of Saffron Iguana's first post unlikely to have been written since role PM. Suggests Chameleon village slipped by calling Seeker powerful role, but could have been deliberate. Finds Scarlet Octopus' assumption of 7 elims high, questiosn why they assume scenario they admit less likely. Definitely doesn't believe eliminators have a coinshot N/A N/A Agree generally with points made - but NAI. Disagree with considering Seeker only power role for village. Believe it to be one of the strongest elim roles available. Unsure Replies to Saffron Iguana, semi-defends Saffron Iguana to Pearl Chameleon, replies to Scarlet Octopus, replies to Turquoise Gorilla Fuchsia Ostrich RP. Responds to Saffron Iguana, suggesting LG74 an exception to Tyrian Falls meta. Says number of eliminatorsdoesn't matter. Calls attention to Pearl Chameleon's thoughts on Coinshot N/A N/A Nothing of note NAI Calls attention to thoughts of Pearl Chameleon Scarlet Octopus Says if elim coinshot, lynch or lose four rounds away. Doesn't find it likely, but says could be balanced with lurchers/seekers N/A N/A Dislike formatting - obfuscates their points. Why call attention to lylo this early? Doesn't inform how we should play game - based on two very unlikely assumptions (7 elims, elim coinshot). Says it could be balanced with thugs, doesn't consider them in lylo calc. Feels alarmist. Fed by recent game meta? NAI None Coral Swan Agrees with Fuchsia Ostrich that number of elims doesn't matter. N/A N/A Agree with them, but NAI NAI Agrees with Fuchsia Ostrich Emerald Falcon RP N/A N/A Difficult formatting NAI None Scarlet Octopus Replies to Coral Swan saying elim numbers don't matter, suggests consensus on lylo point important N/A N/A Why is it important? How does LyLo point alter our gameplay, particularly if based on assumptions. I view use of numbers discussion as only useful to validate opinions on distribution (which I think is of limited value itself), or in late game to check known eliminator views Probably NAI Disagrees with Coral Swan Saffron Iguana Suggests Fuchsia Ostrich bold to assume that GMS didn't take LG74 as a challenge. Replies to Scarlet Octopus Suggests equivalence of v!lurchers to e!seekers. Limited value due to size of group N/A N/A Stranger to asusme GMs did take strange game as challenge. Not sure I follow equivalence. NAI Disagrees with Fuchsia Ostrich, replies to Scarlet Octopus Salmon Meerkat RP N/A N/A RP NAI None Pearl Chameleon Replies to Saffron Iguana. Jokingly suggests seekers not that powerful. Replies to Scarlet Octopus (who queried earlier guess of five elims). Says five felt right. Says maybe six makes more sense. Hadn't realised increase to 26 players. Thinks likely coinshot or mistborn. Expresses sadness at Scarlet Octopus' vote on them. Says elim coinshot would be fun, but is unlikely. N/A N/A Limited conviction in views - adjusting when challenged. NAI? NAI Replies to Saffron Iguana, responds to Pearl Chameleon, notes vote on them Amethyst Scorpion RP. Says elim coinshots too powerful. Notes village lost every Tyrian Falls game, thinks weaker elim team in response. N/A N/A Agree re elim coinshots, NAI argument. Disagree that necessarily weaker elim team, perhaps more conservative distribution though? NAI Doesn't directly reply, engages in thread discussion Salmon Meerkat Says LG74 distribution had been generated for AG5, so unusual distribution possible. Says elim coinshot included in some possible distributions. Votes on Sunburst Toucan Sunburst Toucan N/A More active/experienced player. Thoughts and poke vote NAI NAI Replies to Saffron Iguana/Scarlet Octopus re distribution. Votes on Sunburst Toucan to encourage activity Emerald Falcon Says brain not working N/A N/A Unhelpful - post to stay active? NAI None Scarlet Octopus Replies to Saffron Iguana's suggestion that lurchers less useful to village, suggests can turn games. Kill blocked every other game. N/A N/A Lurchers most of use when village begins to identify trusted villagers. Threat of kill on trusted villager being blocked perhaps of more use than blocked kill itself NAI Replies to Saffron Iguana Salmon Meerkat RP. Complains of reading distribution discussion. Agrees with Coral Swan re pointless element to discussion. Says if village seekers then elim smokers. Notes power of village seeker re alignment/role. Says Elbereth/Fifth have more orthodox doctrine on distribution, but doesn't want to engage in guessing GMs. Retracts from Sunburst Toucan, votes on Pearl Chameleon for making performative vote. Says felt like looking for excuse to vote. Likes Octopus' line of thought, thinks idea of lylo useful. Says vote manip/nks useful for making distribution inferences. Pearl Chameleon Sunburst Toucan Thoughts prior to vote NAI. Agree that Pearl Chameleon's vote was easy, but five player posts prior to it - didn't have much to go on. I often place early votes as tool to generate discussion. In essence, agree with Salmon Meerkat's read of it, do not consider it vote worthy or AI. Query why timing of lylo useful. Voting on Pearl Chameleon's early vote not engaging with context - mild elim read Mild evil Agrees with Octopus, votes on Pearl Chameleo Mauve Crocodile RP. Votes in character on Pearl Chameleon Pearl Chameleon N/A No explanation for vote - query reasoning. Third vote, but one minute after second vote - likely written beforehand. NAI Votes on Pearl Chameleon. Unlikely that Salmon Meerkat and Mauve Crocodile on same team for this reason Melon Dingo RP. Says similar setup to LG74 unlikely N/A N/A Doesn't engage with vote discussion. NAI points NAI None Scarlet Octopus Replies to Emerald Falcon, says we should cleanse "those who bog us down" N/A N/A Agree that Emerald Falcon unhelpful. If suggesting we vote them out, strongly disagree. Easy way to waste information generating discussion. Very mild evil Calls out Emerald Falcon Mauve Crocodile Jokes that distribution is all vanilla with one mistborn. Replies to Turquoise Gorilla, says elim would not make equivalence between elim coinshot and mistborn, and so leans village. Replies to Saffron Iguana that they can't see equivalence between seekers and lurchers N/A N/A Agree with village read on Turquoise Gorilla. Seeking village cred by pointing it out? More likely genuine effort to solve game. Mild village Replies to Saffron Iguana, considers Turquoise Gorilla village lean Pearl Chameleon Responds to Salmon Meerkat's vote on them. Says every first post of game is performative. Says wanted to spur discussion, so looked for a reason to vote. N/A N/A Mild village - agree with logic, and D1 voting generates more information than non-threatening discussion. Have done the same many times as village. Mild Replies to Salmon Meerkat Scarlet Octopus Says Pearl Chameleon feels slimy/evasive. Says they are being backtracky, notes may be tunneling. N/A N/A Disagree - but maybe because I like playstyle of Pearl Chameleon. Adding pressure to Pearl Chameleon, lynch candidate, four hours into cycle. Very mild evil Replies to Mauve Crocodile, supporting lynch of Pearl Chameleon Mauve Crocodile Says Octopi adept at tunneling N/A N/A If suggesting Scarlet Octopus is tunneling, agree. If so, then supporting Pearl Chameleon without making it explicit NAI Potential disagree with Scarlet Octopus, indirect defence of Pearl Chameleon. Potentially just a joking comment Salmon Meerkat Responds to Pearl Chameleon. Says first votes not always banal, cites games. Says dislikes Pearl Chameleon's vote because based on something NAI or bad reasoning, but that villagers can also have bad reasoning. Says feels like Pearl Chameleon not concerned with finding elims but appearing to do so. Doesn't like addition of votes to Pearl Chameleon this early in cycle. N/A N/A I don't disagree that bad reasoning certainly done by villagers. I disagree that voting on tenuous grounds is just to appear to find elims. Entirely legitimate to vote to generate information at this stage of the game, rather than to find eliminators. Rationalisation of earlier vote? Unsure Develops pressure on Pearl Chameleon, but dislikes lynch train growing on them Pearl Chameleon Replies to Scarlet Octopus. Says first vote was a shot in the dark, retracts it. Replies to Salmon Meerkat, says their first vote was shoddy. Says they had thought that having bad reasoning meant evil. N/A Saffron Iguana Dislike reaction to pressure. No conviction in views. If village, perhaps more likely to stand by them? Mild evil Replies to Scarlet Octopus and Salmon Meerkat. Retracts on Saffron Iguana, under pressure. Mauve Crocodile Says they thought their vote would be second on Chameleon, but explicitly notes hasn't retracted it. Says people should vote if they don't like three votes on Chameleon N/A N/A Has not justified their vote on Chameleon, but by making it explicit not hiding on lynch train. NAI NAI Addresses Pearl Chameleon Oxblood Beagle Replies to Emerald Falcon saying their brain doesn't work, agrees N/A N/A Unhelpful, NAI NAI Replies to Emerald Falcon Chartreuse Penguin Provides vote count. Votes on Violet Axolotl. Says normally more talkative. Will be less so this game. Asks to be PMd. Says vote count wrong as missed a page Violet Axolotl N/A Less talkative playstyle generates less information - excuse to hide? Vote on player who hasn't yet posted. NAI Votes on Violet Axolotl Salmon Meerkat Replies to Chartreuse Penguin's vote count. Says they thought more votes on Pearl Chameleon, and too early for that. N/A N/A Indirect discouragement of more votes on Chameleon. NAI Replis to Chartreuse Penguin, indirect discouragement of more votes on Pearl Chameleon Charcoal Hyena Provides emotion based reads on players who have posted. Says Coral Swan felt village, disagrees with Saffron Iguana but says feels like they are trying to solve game. Gets new player feel from Magenta Albatross, says feels geniuine. Leans village on Scarlet Octopus, says tunneling both offputting and reassuring. Leans village on Salmon Meerkat due to poke vote on Sunburst Toucan. Neutral on Chartreuse Penguin, wants more engagement. Neutral on Emeraldn Falcon. Very slight village lean on Fuchsia Ostrich due to nonchalance to number of spiked. Neutral on Mauve Crocodile, suggest their retraction from Pearl Chameleon and encouragement for players to vote elsewhere could mean E/E. Neutral on Melon Dingo, Oxblood Beagle, wants more engagement. Says would have done the same thing as Pearl Chameleon for same reason, suggests more thoughts based on their response. Neutral on Turquoise Gorilla. Suggests Amethyst Scorpion might have slipped with firm language about elim team being weaker. Votes on Amethyst Scorpion Amethyst Scorpion N/A Emotion based reads both useful and convenient to back down from. Mild support of Pearl Chameleon not explicit in post. Question why Salmon Meerkat's poke vote felt alignment indicative. Not sure I agree re Amethyst Scorpion slipping - feels slightly contrived. Post an attempt to seem helpful, having opinions, without committing to them? Unsure - reevaluate Summons all inactive players. Comments on all active players. Unprompted support for Pearl Chameleon, lynch candidate. Votes on Amethyst Scorpion Chartreuse Penguin Responds to Charcoal Hyena, says voted on Violet Axolotl to make them more active. Notes their own mistake on vote count, says they thought their vote split vote four ways. Votes on Charcoal Hyena on gut, but says their reads list an easy way for an elim to gain village cred Charcoal Hyena Violet Axolotl Feels like a genuine and fair read of Charcoal Hyena's post. Very mild village Votes on Charcoal Hyena Salmon Meerkat RP. Retracts from Pearl Chameleon, votes on Amber Vulture for reading thread but not commenting Amber Vulture Pearl Chameleon Lowers pressure on Pearl Chameleon, consistent with earlier statements, but not in way defending them. Fair enough to vote on me. NAI Lowers pressure on Pearl Chameleon, votes on Amber Vulture Saffron Iguana Thanks Charcoal Hyena for reads list. Notes contract between Pearl Chameleon's earlier strong argument and more recent retraction. Thinks a villager would be more likely to not change views under pressure. Replies to Amethyst Scorpion, says theory on elim coinshots being too strong will be tested soon enough, assuming "our coinshot" chooses to shoot tonight. Explains belief in equivalence between v!lurcher and e!seeker as both being a role stronger for other team. Rates elim vote manipulators as limited power N/A N/A Agree re views on pearl Chameleon's actions - feels genuine. Request explanation for what they meant by theory being tested soon enough - why would village coinshot prove elim coinshot as too powerful? Mild village Replies to Charcoal Hyena, Pearl Chameleon, Melon Dingo, Salmon Meerkat, Amethyst Scorpion, Mauve Crocodile. Expresses elim view of Pearl Chameleon Opal Lion Says they have been sleeping N/A N/A Nothing of note NAI None Coral Swan Multiquote. Replies to Scarlet Octopus, notes time of lynch or lose shouldn't change behaviours. Says Mauve Crocodile's view of Turquoise Gorilla a villager thing to do. Says they want to village read Pearl Chameleon for voting on Saffron Iguana as nearly did same thing themselves, notes last anon game discussion sparking player was evil. Replies to Charcoal Hyena's read on Pearl Chameleon, says if you think you'd have done the same thing as what someone did, enough for a D1 village read. Doesn't like that only one red name on list, thinks reasoning for vote on Amethyst Scorpion weak. Thinks absence of read on Pearl Chameleon weird. Reads post as elim based on construction. Replies to Chartreuse Penguin's vote on Hyena, notes agreement re thoughts. Says non-commital tone though more likely to come from a villager. Strongest village reads on Crocodile and Iguana. Strongest elim read on Hyena. Votes on Amber Vulture Amber Vulture N/A Agree with village read on Mauve for read on Turquoise. Having noted that, limited transferable applicability to village read on Coral Swan. Question lack of committal to view on Charcoal Hyena - why no vote? Very mild village Slight, if odd, defence of Pearl Chameleon, elim read on Hyena without a vote. Votes on Amber Vulture Salmon Meerkat Asks Saffron Iguana why seekers absent from Spiked power ranking N/A N/A Sensible question. Saffron Iguana earlier also downplayed power of seeker to spiked Very mild village Queries Saffron Iguana Turquoise Gorilla Quotes player distribution discussion. Says thinks 25% the sweet spot for eliminator numbers, so 6-7 eliminator team N/A N/A Doesn't engage with vote discussion Very mild elim Quotes team distribution discussion, doesn't engage with posts directly Salmon Meerkat Quotes Turquoise Gorilla, points out Tyrian Falls meta build by Metacognition. Calls out further discussion of distribution N/A N/A Agree with points, NAI NAI Replies to Turquoise Gorilla Scarlet Octopus Replies to element of Charcoal Hyena's post considering them. Points out that their own vote wasn't very thorough. Says not going to do reads at this point N/A N/A Calls out Charcoal Hyena, provides sensible logic for their vote remaining in place. NAI Less likely on same team as Charcoal Hyena Quartz Zebra RP. Thinks six eliminators with no coinshot N/A N/A Completely uncontroversial, NAI NAI None Coral Swan RP reply to Quartz Zebra N/A N/A None NAI RP reply to Quartz Zebra Quartz Zebra RP reply to Coral Swan N/A N/A None NAI RP reply to Coral Swan Chartreuse Penguin Asks for reads list from Coral Swan. Suggests absence of elim seeker from Meerkat (Iguana's) power reads because elims might have seeker. Asks players not to roleclaim in PMs (Confuses Meerkat and Iguana) N/A N/A Agree with view of Iguana, feels like engaging with posts in attempt to solve game. Distancing? Possible, probably not Mild village Confuses Salmon Meerkat and Saffron Iguana. Unlikely to be on a team with either. Less likely to be on elim team with Saffron Iguana Salmon Meerkat Points out that Chartreuse Penguin meant Safron Iguana in post 55. Comments on roleclaiming. N/A N/A Nothing alignment indicative NAI Replies to Chartreuse Penguin Chartreuse Penguin Acknowledges Salmon Meerkat re confusion on player identities. Says village will lose more from genuine roleclaims. N/A N/A NAI NAI Replies to Salmon Meerkat Amethyst Scorpion Replies to Charcoal Hyena's read list. Says Coral Swan helpful with opinions, "keeping options open alignment wise". Says Saffron Iguana's opinions on Seekers and Lurchers justified. Points out that new players can also be eliminators. Respinds to vote saying qualifiers in opinions. N/A N/A Sensible engagement with post, NAI NAI Says Saffron Iguana's views on seekers justified. Replies to Charcoal Hyena, who voted on them Salmon Meerkat Replies to Chartreuse Penguin, will not engage in fakeclaiming. N/A N/A NAI NAI Replies to Chartreuse Penguin Coral Swan RP reply to Quartz Zebra. Says mathematically revealing role to another player at random likely to be village, calls it a terrible idea. Asks Amethyst Scorpion to clarify their read on them N/A N/A NAI N Replies to Quartz Zebra, Chartreuse Penguin, Amethyst Scorpion Violet Axolotl RP. Votes on Turquoise Gorilla for trying to look helpful whilst not helping Turquoise Gorilla N/A Agree with observation of Turquoise Gorilla's actions. Very mild village Votes on Turquoise Gorilla Oxblood Beagle Replies to Charcoal Hyena asking them to give more information. Thinks distribution discussion irrelevant N/A N/A Doesn't provide any more relevant discussion themselves NAI Replies to Charcoal Hyena Saffron Iguana Replies to Salmon Meerkat spotting absense of spiked seeker from power list, doesn't give explanation. Says value would be after smokers. Agrees with Violet Axolotl that Turquoise Gorilla not being helpful. N/A N/A Query reason for omission. Agree with view on Turquoise Gorilla's actions. NAI Supports Violet Axolotl's view on Turquoise Gorilla Opal Lion Asks whether we know if everyone has a role N/A N/A Hasn't read rules. Claiming a role. Could be confised villager, or eliminator deliberately seeking to give impression Mild village None Oxblood Beagle Replies to Opal Lion, says not role madness N/A N/A Has been following thread NAI Replies to Opal Lion Amber Vulture Says had been hoping to do a longer post. Says has been seen on thread because trying to keep up, but working. Says Scarlet Octopus focus on lylo alarmist. In absence of better idea, votes on Scarlet Octopus Scarlet Octopus N/A Shouldn't post when tired on half-recollections. Not considered other posts by other players. Clearly ought to be lynched immediately Steel Inquisitor Calls out views of and votes on Scarlet Octopus Mauve Crocodile Replies to Charcoal Hyena, suggests reads lists early D1 are village leaning because harder for eliminator. Asks Saffron Iguana what information would be gained from a coinshot kill. Asks Coral Swan why they are voting on Amber Vulture if their strongest eliminator read is on Hyena. Replies to Amber Vulture, says villagers most likely to be pessimistic about distribution N/A N/A Strongly disagree re view on D1 reads - always much easier for me when eliminator - feel less pressure to be right. Fair point re Scarlet Octopus. Gut very mild village Supports Charcoal Hyena, questions voting of Coral Swan, replies to Amber Vulture defending Scarlet Octopus Scarlet Octopus Replies to Amber Vulture, saying "not the best reasoning, but valid" N/A N/A Nothing meaningful NAI Replies to Amber Vulture Coral Swan Replies to Mauve Crocodile. Doesn't feel settled enough on read of Hyena to want them dead. Voted on Amber Vulture to add pressure N/A N/A Fair enough answer, review connections later on NAI Says not sure about read on Charcoal Hyena. Vote on Amber Vulture to add pressure. Mauve Crocodile Replies to Coral Swan, is satisfied with their explanation N/A N/A NAI NAI Replies to Coral Swan Saffron Iguana Responds to Mauve Crocodile's query of their thoughts on N1 revealing an elim coinshot. Assumes any coinshot will shoot tonight, except hesitant village on. If three kills, probably eliminator coinshot. Responds to Amber Vulture, says Scarlet Octopus just pessimistic N/A N/A Not sure I buy the logic here - they themselves acknowledge complications. Suggest speculating on impact of night rurn on distribution better done as post hoc analysis. Gut mild evil Responds to Mauve Crocodile, Amber Vulture, defends Scarlet Octopus Salmon Meerkat Says from PMs light village read on Amethyst Scorpion. Retracts from Amber Vulture because they guessed successfully my identity and didn't wish to see me dead. Returns vote to Pearl Chameleon. Pearl Chameleon Amber Vulture Mild gut good from presentation of read on Amethyst Scorpion. Vote on Pearl Chameleon interesting - from reading thread I'm (at post 72) inclined to agree with it. Gut feeling that Salmon Meerkat trying to solve the game. Gut mild good PM with Amethyst Scorpion, mild village read. Retracts from Amber Vulture based on player identity. Votes on Pearl Chameleon Magenta Albatross Replies to Saffron Iguana. Admits to having asked players for roles in PMs. Provides updated vote counts. Suggests they have mild village reads on those who didn't want to role trade in PMs. Says they don't know who to vote for N/A N/A I think acknowledging having been phishing is NAI. Possibly leaning elim - felt better to come into open about it first? Clearly engaged with game if Pming, doesn't give reads from PMs despite claiming they have them. Dislike their reluctance to vote. Mild evil Replies to Saffron Iguana, claims to have PMd multiple players Elbereth Admin GM GM GM GM GM Coral Swan Gives read list. Mauve Crocodile, Magenta Albatross as village. Salmon Meerkat, Chartreuse Penguin, Scarlet Octopus, Fuchsia Ostrich, Amethyst Scorpion as light village. Quartz Zebra, Saffron Iguana, Pearl Chameleon light spiked. Charcoal Hyena, Turquoise Gorilla spiked. Not sure about their reads on Hyena, Chameleon, Iguana, Scorpion and Penguin. Everyone else null or hasn't posted. Wants to vote for a null read, as wants to develop other reads more before voting for them. Retracts from Amber Vulture, votes on Melon Dingo, as their posts just mirror earlier thoughts Melon Dingo Amber Vulture Doesn't give reasons for reads. Strong dislike of not wanting elim reads lynched - seems not to want to be held to their reads by alignment reveal Moderate evil Votes on Melon Dingo, retracts from Amber Vulture. See post summary for views on other players Oxblood Beagle Finds it odd that Coral Swan voting for a null read over an eliminator read. Votes on Coral Swan Coral Swan N/A Completely agree with analysis Mild village Votes on Coral Swan, calls out their logic Salmon Meerkat RP reply to Coral Swan N/A N/A NAI NAI None Opal Lion RP N/A N/A NAI NAI None Violet Axolotl Asks Coral Swan to join their vote on Turquoise Gorilla, as Coral Swan has Turquoise Gorilla as an elim read N/A N/A Committed to their vote, consistent view Mild village Asks Coral Swan to vote on Turquoise Gorilla Coral Swan Says voting for null read because doesn't want to kill based on poor read, would rather kill less active player for "almost as much reason". Responds to Violet Axolotl, says they will consider voting for Turquoise Gorilla. Doesn't know whether they feel stronger about Charcoal Hyena or Turquoise Gorilla N/A N/A I still think the logic is fundamentally flawed. Beyond that, lynching less actives has been discussed to death, and I remain fo the view that it is largely useless. Moderate evil Replies to Oxblood Beagle, and Violet Axolotl's request they vote on Turquoise Gorilla Onyx Flamingo RP. Votes on Violet Axolotl for being over eager to lynch Turquoise Gorilla. Violet Axolotl N/A Possible defence of Turquoise Gorilla? Disagree that trying to persuade others of your view is suspicious Mild evil Votes on Violet Axolotl, indirect defense of Turquoise Gorilla Violet Axolotl Responds to Onyx Flamingo, defending (sarcastically) trying to persuade others of their view N/A N/A NAI NAI Replies to Onyx Flamingo Saffron Iguana Calls out Magenta Albatross for hedging their views. Says they receieved PMs from Amethyst Scorpion and Magenta Albatross N/A N/A Agree with calling out of Magenta Albatross NAI Calls out Magenta Albatross Scarlet Octopus Replies to Saffron Iguana's defence of Scarlet Octopus to Amber Vulture. Says their pessimism is because games almost always go to lynch or lose N/A N/A Haven't been following recent games. Makes sense if formative game experience NAI Response to Saffron Iguana re Amber Vulture Coral Swan Says Onyx Flamingo's post is light village due to tone and commitment. Hasn't received PMs N/A N/A Disagree, based on content of post Very mild evil Supports Onyx Flamingo Scarlet Octopus RP N/A N/A NAI NAI None Mauve Crocodile Read list. Null for Amber Vulture. Positive for Charcoal Hyena for early reads list, even though they disagree with contents. Positive for Chartreuse Penguin as reads overanalysing as village. Positive reads on Coral Swan for finding village slip in post by Pearl Chameleon, negative for not voting based on reads, positive for explanation of not doing so. Negative for Oxblood Beagle for opportunistic vote. Negative for Pearl Chameleon for asking village coinshots to hold off. Null for Saffron Iguana. Positive for Salmon Meerkat for PMs. Positive for Scarlet Octopus for paranoia. Positive for Turquoise Gorilla for conflation of elim coinshot and mistborn. Positive for Violet Axolotl for trying to persuade people onto a train - willingness to own consequences N/A N/A Unless I've missed a retraction, vote presently on Pearl Chameleon. Disagree with some conclusions - e.g. on Oxblood Beagle. Very mild village See post Charcoal Hyena Replies to Chartreuse Penguin's vote on them. Claims to have started writing reads post before logging in to see alignment. Says solves game by narrowing pool of suspects down. Says switching reads a good thing for determining alignment. Says initially read Pearl Chameleon as village for first post, but reaction to pressure needs looking at. Says village read of Magenta not just because they give new player vibes, but village new player vibes N/A N/A Reminds me of a very dangerous player… Call out writing part of post before logging in. Odd behaviour - although not necessarily alignment indicative, merely player being prepared to be an eliminator. Willingness to admit it perhaps reduces likelihood of this. Explanation of how they solve game NAI. Gut read that genuinely trying to solve game. Watch carefully. Timezone aligns with dangerous player. Reevaluate frequently, gut village Replies to Chartreuse Penguin, Safrron Iguana. Coral Swan, Scarlet Octopus, Mauve Crocodile, Amethyst Scorpion Coral Swan RP. Appreciates Charcoal Hyena's method of solving game. N/A N/A None. Large part of what Charcoal Hyena said was NAI, yet also get village gut read NAI Reply to Charcoal Hyena Oxblood Beagle Responds to Coral Swan's explanation of not voting for their reads. Says it makes sense, but that they have historically ignored too many gut reads N/A N/A Not sure they should be letting Coral Swan off that lightly NAI Reply to Coral Swan Coral Swan Replies to Oxblood Beagle, says they don't trust their own gut. Respects Oxblood Beagle's vote on them N/A N/A Not worried by vote, but under no lynch pressure. NAI Reply to Oxblood Beagle Fuchsia Ostrich Thought Charcoal Hyena was Fifth Scholar, but now realises that Fifth IMing. Asks Coral Swan why they read Mauve Crocodile as village, as strong gut read on Mauve Crocodile as evil. Votes on Mauve Crocodile Mauve Crocodile N/A Also have mild village read on Mauve Crocodile. Would like to see if Fuchsia Ostrich can articulate their gut view Very mild evil Question to Coral Swan, vote on Mauve Crocodile Coral Swan Replies to Fuchsia Ostrich, says Mauve Crocodile's posts read village. Early reads not likely to have been made by eliminator. Approach to solving seems solid. N/A N/A Approach to solving should be NAI - easy to replicate if evil. Agree re tonal reading of posts. Willingness to defend views Mild village Defence of Mauve Crocodile, response to Fuchsia Ostrich Fifth Scholar Clarification that co-GM, not IM GM GM GM GM GM Charcoal Hyena Thanks Mauve Crocodile for reads list. Says late for them, so will just update the vote count N/A N/A Very late at 5:30am GMT. NAI NAI Appreciates Mauve's read list Violet Axolotl Jokes to Fifth Scholar N/A N/A NAI NAI None Salmon Meerkat Joking responses N/A N/A NAI NAI None Scarlet Octopus Joke N/A N/A NAI NAI None Mauve Crocodile Joking responses N/A N/A NAI NAI None Salmon Meerkat Joking responses N/A N/A NAI NAI None

I’d been hoping to do a longer post today, collating my thoughts, but don’t have the time tonight, so will put my recollections from scanning the thread earlier down, in the hope that having joined the conversation will make it easier to remain engaged. In brief response to the votes on me, I’ve checked the thread a few times through the day whilst working, trying to keep up with it, but don’t have the capacity to post during the working day. My general thoughts are that distribution discussion is generally of limited value, and distribution discussion based on one game yet less useful. We’ll get information about distribution as the game goes on. I’m not sure whether I ought to be considering it alignment indicative, but Scarlet Octopus suggesting lynch or lose on cycle four struck me as alarmist. I think were the game balanced in such a way, our GMs would have erred, but more importantly, I don’t see the value at all in thinking about the end game now. Our objective is to find eliminators regardless, and if we can arbitrarily raise our level of analysis due to concern about turns remaining, we ought to do so regardless. I haven’t even considered the votes yet, and won’t do so until the morning. For now, having no better ideas yet, I’ll put my own vote on Scarlet Octopus.

ya know, for all the open wolfing, the best evil monologue so far has come from v!Mouse Speech, speech, speech

That'd be the theoretical coverage. Saying you were in Mateform together. Mouse, was anyone else in the PM? Doesn't really matter, I'm the odd villager out or v!Flamingo is defecting. Just curious. Weasel I accuse Flamingo of being evil for not making a PM.

So here’s how things look. It is a safe assumption that either Mouse or I are in Mediationform. The other plans to assume Workform today. Scorpion is in Workform and Flamingo is in Mediationform. Weasel’s form is unknown, but assumed to be Nimbleform. Flamingo and Weasel are the only one with unaccounted for actions last Night, so one of them submitted the kill. If Weasel is an elim, Scorpion must also be evil because they covered for each other. If Flamingo is an elim, they must be solo because the game didn’t end when they had Mediationform which would have given them parity if they had another teammate. The best course of action is to vote out Weasel today. With dots representing the Mediationforms, if they and Scorpion are evil, this will bring it from 3v**;2e to 3v**;1e to 2v*;1e with the NK, then we can kill Scorpion for the win. If Flamingo is evil, it’ll go from 4v*;1e* to 3v*;1e* to 2v;1e* with the NK. Note that this is not vote parity because the remaining villagers both have Workform and can subtract one of Flamingo’s votes. So the village will win the exe. Let’s say we vote out v!Flamingo today instead. It can go from 3**;2e to 2*;2e to 1v;2e with the NK. So I’m only comfortable voting out Flamingo today if they explicitly open-wolf, knowing that to do so as a villager would be gamethrowing. If they are evil though, I wouldn’t complain. This is IRL day 24; I was going to support shortened days anyway Edit: Unless, @Azure Mouse was there a PM Part 2 from Weasel that I wasn't added to? I only got Part 1

what are you trying to do, activate the Winter Soldier?