Quintessential
-
Posts
1691 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
News
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by Quintessential
-
Er... see what Araris said. To be more specific, I didn't want Illwei to die for the same reason that I wanted you to die: because when the two of you were tied, two people quickly voted Illwei, and both of the votes read... off to me. If I had just removed my vote from her at the time, she still would have had more votes (and I didn't want her to die, so...). Besides, I was somewhat working off of the theory that it was a tie between a villager and an elim, and at least one of [Araris, Elan] was voting to save the elim. All of that, plus the elim gut read I'd had on you for a little while, was enough for me to want to vote you. (so, @Gears see here for an explanation of my reasons for voting Dannex. None of it was directly related to anything Dannex did, except the vibes, but it definitely wasn't a random vote.)
-
Suspicious of me for what, exactly?
-
Yeahhhh pretty much : P I'd say I'm currently most suspicious of Araris (when Illwei and Dannex were tied the first time, he was the one who broke it in Illwei's "favor", and the tone in which he did it read off to me). If Araris flips elim, I'd definitely be quite sus of Dannex as well. For a similar reason (tone + timing) I'm suspicious of Elan's vote on Illwei. It wasn't a tiebreaking vote, but she seemed to think it was. Of course, alternatively we could just exe Dannex : P unlike Ash, the vote manipped off of him makes me more suspicious of him, not less. And that might give some information on Araris, (potentially) Elan, and to a lesser extent anyone else who voted for either of the two when they were tied or one vote away from being tied (if Dannex flips elim that is)
-
So... a Spokesperson wanted Illwei dead then. There was a vote removed from Dannex : P Edit: or I s'pose maybe someone wanted Dannex alive, instead...
-
Which is probably what gets you exed so often. And yeah, that's... kind of my point I know it's not an elim tell, I just... compulsively point that kind of thing out anyway, ig.
-
Well but you always win ties, right? And Dannex has a habit of losing them (though one of those times it was intentionally so idk if that actually counts). And yeah, I get what Striker's saying, just--contradictions. : P
-
Even though... when you made that post... you were arguing that Elan didn't have to break the tie... between Dannex and Illwei? .... Huh. Edit: @Illwei should I be scared that I agree with everything you said in that post except the stuff about me?
-
Contradiction much?
-
(Stated) reasoning behind every vote that has been placed this cycle (bold = votes still currently in place): Archer votes Illwei: poke vote. Quinn votes Tani: poke vote. Araris votes Archer: poke stab vote (apparently; I don't actually know what the difference is XD) Striker votes Archer: making suggestions about the order of Events that benefit the elims. Menot votes Illwei: gut read. Illwei votes TUO: no reasoning stated. TJ votes Randby: poke vote. Books votes Araris: fake-claiming Ruthar (was later clarified that this was a reference to Araris' RP name, at which point Books removed the vote) Quinn votes Archer: gut. Illwei votes Whysper: no reason stated at the time; later clarified that it was because Whysper has only been making short posts Elan votes Tani: for being hesitant to vote someone Tani votes Araris: in response to Araris stating the reasons for voting D1 Whysper votes Dannex: elim vibes from one of his posts Illwei votes Dannex: no reasoning stated Quinn votes Illwei: for assuming she'd be voted off + a bit of tone/LAMIST (you used that acronym first, Illwei! it's fair game now ) Tani votes Dannex: no reasoning stated. Araris votes Illwei: LG74 vibes from her, plus Araris agrees w/ me apparently Elan votes Illwei: to avoid a tie. Quinn votes Dannex: to vote on someone other than Illwei Tani votes (?) Illwei: for being elim in LG74 and being not Dannex Tani votes Dannex: no reasoning stated. Dannex votes Tani: for saying there was no reason to vote Dannex and then voting Dannex in the same post. Current VC (yes I saw and fixed the mistake in the old one : P yell at me if anything else is wrong lol): Illwei (4): Archer, Menot, Araris, Elan Archer (1): Striker Randby (1): TJ Dannex (4): Whysper, Illwei, Tani, Quinn Tani (1): Dannex I mean, I don't mind Gears is only in my signature because he's the one who made up the names. Awww that's sweet of you
-
@Araris Valerian see the edit : P
-
This is the only post of Striker's that mentions vote-manip as far as I could tell (time is a commodity that I happen to have ) (Stated) reasoning behind every vote that has been placed this cycle (bold = votes still currently in place): Archer votes Illwei: poke vote. Quinn votes Tani: poke vote. Araris votes Archer: poke vote. Striker votes Archer: making suggestions about the order of Events that benefit the elims. Edit: oops apparent ctrl + Enter = submit post I didn't mean to post this yet (or to double post). I'll finish it and... idk whether I'll edit it in or c/p it into a new post : P
-
Ahhh something feels wrong about this and I can't figure out what :///// It- just- it feels like you're assuming she's elim, almost? Just because there's honest suspicion on her doesn't mean she's elim--just that some people, probably at least a few of whom legitimately don't know anyone's alignment but their own, think she's elim. Confirmed good does not mean confirmed right. Not-confirmed-good definitely does not mean confirmed right. So... I don't really get... what... yeah. If you're voting Illwei because you agree with the arguments for voting her, then cool. But if you don't actually agree with them, and are just voting her because you want to avoid a tie--I mean... go ahead, but you seriously don't have to? I don't really... see what's so bad about having a tie D1 (in this specific game that is). Also, for reference, here is a current VC: Illwei (5): Archer, Menot, Quinn, Araris, Elan Archer (2): Araris, Striker Randby (1): TJ Dannex (3): Whysper, Illwei, Tani As you can see, moving your vote wouldn't lead to a tie anyway : P if that helps at all. I mean... I don't think you sound like LG74 Illwei at all, actually. And note that the person saying that was on the elim team with you, and thus may have a somewhat skewed perception of what elim!you sounds like : P Actually y'know what let's Illwei Dannex. The sudden accumulation of votes on Illwei bothers me, but I might ignore it if it weren't for the fact that both of them felt off to me. With both of those things... yeah. New VC: Illwei (4): Archer, Menot, Araris, Elan Archer (2): Araris, Striker Randby (1): TJ Dannex (4): Whysper, Illwei, Tani, Quinn
-
I was about to say this, how dare you get there first
-
Yeah uh I'm gonna second (third?) this. I have some slight gut against Dannex but... like... why is everyone else voting him? Just... gut? : P Edit: wait there are only three people voting him I coulda sworn there were more than that huh okay don't mind me
-
...I'd be more concerned about the indirect shade thing if I hadn't heard that from village you in the past : P idk, "indirect shade" doesn't really seem like a reason for concern to me, because no one's gonna vote you on it, so... but anyway. Those are still like two people, one of whom you were voting for? plus Menot who's new anyway.
-
...we talked about how it's a terrible acronym, not how it's a terrible reason. And besides, it's more just that you were talking about how you were going to be voted off when A. you weren't even in the lead, B. you only had two votes, C. one of those two votes was a poke, placed by someone who would probably have wanted to move the vote elsewhere because he was in the lead, and D. there are 5.5 hours left in the cycle. So it just seems... like an overreaction. okay, overreaction is the wrong word, but it's more... like, being overly worried? about what's going to happen to you. When nobody was really expressing suspicion of you in the first place. that reads elim to me.
-
Uhhhh wow okay so there goes my null village read on Illwei. Current VC: Illwei (2): Archer, Menot Archer (3): Araris, Striker, Quinn Randby (1): TJ Tani (1): Elan Araris (1): Tani Dannex (2): Whysper, Illwei So... Illwei's not about to be voted off... especially since there are 5.5 hours left in the cycle... so that comment just strikes me as odd. Or... idk, performative or something. Like, "look at me, I'm casually so village, you should really just vote someone else :))))" especially since she seems to assume she'll end up voted off? When really one of those votes was a poke by Archer, who just hasn't moved it. Uhhh yeah I'm gonna... Archer Illwei
-
...I think I kind of just said it does mean that? idk XD
-
Does this mean you don't normally feel moderately alright with me? lol A. Ah, so that's why the Whysper vote and B. just because someone you read as elim votes someone else you read as elim doesn't mean you can't read them both elim XD it doesn't even mean they can't both be elim, as I've learned the hard way >> (*cough* you and Maill in LG74 *cough*)
-
I have "Menot" as a placeholder in my notes doc, but I figured that sounded weird so I'd just use whatever ended up catching on, once something did. Reasoning?
-
Eh, I suppose. I mostly feel bad voting him 'cause he was misexed C2 in the MR : P but sure, Archer @Whysper I believe forget me not is Mat's younger sister and is new to forum mafia? iirc from the signups.
-
So we're more than halfway through the cycle and this is the current VC: Illwei (1): Archer Archer (2): Araris, Striker TUO (1): Illwei Randby (1): TJ I... don't even think most of those are serious votes, but regardless. I'm aware that I'm not currently voting, so it's ig partially my fault we have so few votes? In a way. But really it's just that none of our discussion has turned NAI (edit: turned AI; turned away from NAI; whatever. You get my point) yet, so I don't have much of an idea who to vote, beyond Books and Dannex sounding slightly different than typical village them. And Archer. But I don't... voting based on gut doesn't really generate discussion so idk that that would help, and I'm not sure I'm comfortable with voting on gut at this point anyway : P
-
@Matrim's Dice please confirm that none of the players have been given the role "Harry Potter"?
-
Right, I figure we would just assume absolutely nothing about the person--we (the general public) can't even necessarily assume they're HP, since the whole elim team will know how many HPs there are, so the claimant could easily be a non-HP elim trying to mislead us about their identity.
-
Yes, ik and I agree. Just that specific problem isn't one of them. More pressing concerns: having the HPs claim gives the elims far more information than it gives the village. It narrows the elims' potential-Dalinar pool down to all non-elim HPs, whereas it only narrows the village's Sadeas pool down to all HPs. So, having the HPs claim benefits the elims more in that regard. It also narrows down the elims' potential-Elhokar pool to non-elim non-HPs, at which point they could either burn through them with NKs or have Sadeas scan them all until one comes up vanilla, and then kill that one. I mean, honestly the ideal strat for the elims is to convince the HPs to claim, NK the ones people trust and get the ones people don't trust misexed, and meanwhile scan all the non-HPs until one turns up vanilla, and NK that one. I think a more practical question would be: is it worth it to ask one of the non-Dalinar HPs to come forward and state how many HPs there are, once they've found out? That way we can have some idea of the distribution of HP to non-HP, without giving the elims too much info about who is and isn't HP (it only narrows the potential-Elhokar pool by 1 person). The nice thing about it is, they can't even try to sabotage it by lying about the number of HPs; if one of them does, they'd risk another (village) HP claiming with a different number of HPs. If we as a group see differing numbers, all we'd have to do is exe one of them (or tie them) to find out who's lying. So in the long run, lying about the number of HPs requires them to out a member. Edit: I had this in my original version of this post and forgot to add it back in after doing the proofreading/formatting: when I read Archer's suggestion originally, it seemed like a good idea because it only had the positives listed specifically. Now that I've gone and written down/worked out the negatives as well, I've changed my mind : P
