|TJ|

As there are conversion elements to the game, I feel obliged to inform everyone the following as there are bound to be some strong opinions - Please play to our CURRENT win-condition. What this means is to avoid playing for a future conversion and to avoid scheming with the opposition in the hopes of a conversion. Remember that you have an obligation to your team. At the same time - please do not make definitive statements that could hinder someone's plans and playstyles. Statements like preemptively saying "if someone does X action, I will see them as Y alignment" or "we need to kill whoever does Z action" or "everyone needs to do W action" can come across as very limiting to players. Player feel forced to take certain paths which never feels good, and it can appear as 'mayoring'. Please avoid doing so. Back to the game!

Friendly reminder that you have an IM available to you at all times! Please reach out to me if you feel uncomfortable with anything that's being said at any point in the game! Essentially, you can ping or PM me for any possible reason you can think of, except anything related to the game rules. That's Jo's job :P. Happy hunting!

It is not my fault that Shard does not allow 2-character display names -.-'

Hey @Archer, I was updating the list and just wanted to point out that you had 2 MRs on the list and you've used them up for MR76 and MR77. You had one slot's description as 'Cooperative PM Pairs', but that slot has been used up now. Let us know if you want to add an MR slot with this description again.

It's recent thing, only happened after the last AG. Also, it'll be the first game I'll be IMing fully!

I'll reiterate what I said in the dead doc. I'm sorry I couldn't do justice to everyone else to who played the game, I wish I could have been more active. GG Coco, and rest of the elim team! And thanks @Archer, for running a fun game! @Illwei, lovely to see you back even though we barely interacted, hope you stick around for more games :')

In simple terms, you essentially stated that you don't mind if we ML a player because we can survive the rebuke tonight. While that is correct, it is also a permanent +1 enmity which is a problem in the long run, and absolutely benefits the elims. *** I've been thinking - Grub confirmed to us that they did receive a 'you've been blocked' message by Archer, so this means TUC did block Grub truly. The only way he does that, and NOT submit the kill is if he knew and was absolutely certain that the kill was submitted by someone. This means that the reason why we didn't see the kill was indeed because it had been blocked by Mint. I guess they could have said they submitted and then forgotten to actually do so, but what are the chances. Which is why I think no-kill = v!Mint

I think this is suspicious lol.

oooooffff, yikes that was a bad read. I'm okay going over if you need to sort me out. Just give me the 48 hours to solve the game now, and hopefully I'm right in my legacy reads. I think I'm looking at Hopper a bit, because of their pop-in timings. But yeah, it's wide open now it could be anyone. Another re-read pending!

Be the change you want to see?

you are taking away a LOT of context behind the post. this is grub reacting to someone who has essentially sentenced them to death and I believe their reaction is very important to their alignment, and cannot be simply whittled down to a 'single post'. TUC has been fully in his village meta. I don't see TUC being linked it ANYONE else whereas you can be linked to Grub, and a team of Grub/Mint makes perfect sense. @Hoid Slayer, this is another point. Who do you think is teamed up with Hoid? Star? Hopper? Both of them make way way less sense that Grub/Mint.

Noted: Grub's hesitancy to switch to Mint. @coco.pudding, read my case on Grub/Mint

You mean Mint saved you. Bro, you are ignoring bigger evidence and hyper-focusing on the illwei issue. how about you shoot TUC with shardblade next cycle?

Posting Illwei's explanation of the situation - @Hoid Slayer, what was your PM with Coder like?

Bro, there is no use of clearing people anymore. Best case scenario, it's 6-2 now, and it could very well be 5-3. If there is an ML and they get off a kill, it would be 4-2 (3-3) and Enmity = 3. Let us assume the aim would be to lie that they would be providing Favor, so they also get a second rebuke next cycle (an extra kill). If they have enough vote manip, then they win even without a majority, which is why we should treat this cycle as lylo. @Through the Living Hopper, you should see the above argument for e!Grub/e!Mint/v!TUC same actually.