Mid-Range Game 8: Highborn Intrigue

[Macen he/him]

Macen, you're definitely misremembering. STINK was against day one lynches, when most of us were for them: that's part of the reason I suspected him as much as I did. I think he ended up voting for someone by the end of it, but he didn't like the idea, and was quite vocal about that fact.

 

Edit: Fixing spelling mistakes.

Right you are Raven. I went back and for some reason I thought that stink had made the post Orlok did.

[Herowannabe he/him]

At this point, it looks like a three-way tie. I'd still like to hear from Alvron, though I'll end up moving my vote if the focus stays off of him for much longer. Kipper and Alvom, I understand why you're suspicious of me, but I'm going after inactives to test a personal theory of mine, though I'm not sure how well it's going to work.

So far this game, we've had very few players stay inactive, and each time someone drops out of activity, someone else jumps right onto them. Alvom, I know you pointed me out for jumping onto Alvron, but Herowannabe has also been focusing on inactives over all else, if just in the form of "I'm playing this game with a focus on lynching inactives to keep everyone in the game." I suspect that all of the eliminators in this game are still active, and are trying to keep our focus on the inactives in order to take the focus off of them, as they are all actively playing.

Of course, this doesn't help me look any less innocent, considering I've been targeting inactives as well, but I was hoping to get one more inactive confirmed as a villager before proposing this tactic, and the fact that, if I'm right, Hero is possibly an eliminator who's phrasing his plan in terms of "lets change gears towards lynching inactives" rather than making it obvious that this is a plan to distract us from the real problem.

I don't know if I'm right or not. I could be reading the situation entirely wrong, but I am suspicious of Hero's turn to focusing on inactives, and I've been hoping to build up more proof before revealing my thoughts - a plan that only works if I wasn't a possible target on the block at the moment. If I die this round, not revealing my thoughts is more dangerous than revealing them.

Of course, now that I've said all this, the eliminators, if this is truly their plan, have a chance to change tactics, making my vote on Alvron no longer viable in my strategy. I'm going to hold off placing my vote, which might be incredible stupid considering I'm a target this round, but I really don't suspect Araris like some other people seem to do, and I'd rather leave it as a tie at the moment.

Edit: Clarification

Don't misunderstand me. Yes I am focusing on Inactives in a big way, but I am not focusing on them "above all else." I have several suspicions, I'm just keeping those cards close to my chest for now and waiting and watching. And until some of my suspicions solidify a bit more, I'm focusing on taking out Inactives.

I actually very nearly voted for one of the people I strongly suspect (I'd say about 75% certain they're an eliminator) based on their behavior so far this game. I even typed out the post casting the vote for that player, but then changed my mind halfway through, and voted for Emerald instead. I decided to wait a cycle or two before calling out the one I suspect most.

You see, I was the GM for LG12, and in it I watched as Metacognition scanned an eliminator on the first night, but then stayed quiet about it for several cycles. He did this so that he could watch her and see if she gave away any of her compatriots. That's kind of what I'm doing here- I'm not an Ardent, so I don't have the same level of confirmation as Meta did, but I'm reasonably sure, so I'm watching this player and a few others to see what they do next.

Rest assured I will voice suspicions those soon, when the time is right.

And actually, for what it's worth, I don't suspect you Raven (no more so than anyone else, that is). I find it interesting to see who is jumping on the lynch train though. Now let's wait and see who decides to jump off...

[RavenRadient7 she/her]

Winter, I was in QF9, though I'm not entirely sure if you're asking the question of me, or of Alvom. I don't remember Alvom being in QF9, though I could be wrong, and I can't speak for any other game.

 

Beyond that, I suspect that the eliminators only have/had two Brightlords/ladies, due to the no extra vote this cycle. I think we would have seen someone with a vote this round if the eliminators still had enough to place multiple votes on a person, and give them an extra vote. Of course, they could still have two votes, and have tied with a person who had gotten two votes on them by villagers, but I would guess that the eliminators only have one vote left.

[Alvron he/him]

On 8/25/2015 at 9:21 PM, TheMightyLopen said:

Alvron, as you are one of the most experienced players, it seems like you would be a little more active than you've been. You haven't voted for anyone yet, but it is only the beginning of Day 3 and you said you were working Day 2 so pretty excusable. I would very much like to hear your thoughts and analysis about the game so far.

I'll be back on in about 10 or 11 hours as I'm going to sleep now. 

As I am one of the more experienced players many will know that I am never very active, also that I almost never vote on the first 2-3 cycles.  Sometimes I vote only once or twice during the whole game.

On 8/26/2015 at 7:26 AM, Adamir said:

In terms of roles, this is my estimate for which roles are active in the game, including the dead.

1 villager assassin, as the Eliminators already have a night kill and one of their own was assassinated

1 villager worldsinger, as there have been no vote manipulations visible except for con artist vote changes since Phattemer was lynched

4-6 Brightlords and Brightladies, with one third to half of which are Eliminators, to compensate for their lack of a Worldsinger

1-2 villager Ardents, as the Ardent as a role is completely useless to Eliminators

1 villager courier, dead

1-2 villager guardsmen, one of whom is dead

1-2 villager artifabrians

1 Eliminator courier, just guesswork

1 Eliminator artifabrian, allowing them to temporarily corrupt guardsmen into killing their charges then tricking them into defending their next targets

2 con artists, as seen with the vote manipulation after Phattemer's death (my vote and Mailliw's), one of whom is likely an Eliminator to balance things out

That's only 19 roles and we have 28 players total.  I've already given my estimates on what I think the eliminators have so I won't repeat them here but I am curious as to why you think it's a good idea to speculate on what number/roles the village has.  That sort of information is something that the Eliminators are always wanting to know and the village doesn't need to know.

I still haven't gone through everything but at the moment Raven is the top suspect for me mostly due to what Wilson said via PM.  However Hero is also up there due to a similar play style he used another time he was an Eliminator.


O' GM of GMs, may we have a cycle extension?

Edited October 28, 2016 by Alvron

[Shallan she/her]

I probably won't vote yet. Although Raven could certainly be an Eliminator, I generally don't like to hop on trains until I'm guaranteed they won't crash. (unlike QF8) I'm reading through this day's thread again now. So the suspicions of Raven are based off of Wilson's analysis and her vote back in Day 1. I'm also noticing that before Adamir and Macen voted, Raven only had 2 votes. (yes Shallan 4-2=2)

This train just feels a little contrived, and I also think that a lot of the time after a train has gotten started there isn't really a way to stop or derail it. (except back in day 1, but whatever) So I might vote for one of the people that were suspects before the Raventrain got started.

 

Aaaaaaand I just got 'd by 4 people.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Shallan

[RavenRadient7 she/her]

Edit: Repetition Post.

Edited August 25, 2015 by RavenRadient7

[Renegade he/him]

 

O' GM of GMs, may we have a cycle extension?

 

Fine. The Day turn will now end 24 hours later, on Wednesday, at 10 PM EST (the same time all of the turns are over).

[Araris Valerian he/him]

Well, I am going to vote for Venture Mistborn. His vote on Mailliw yesterday was a bit weird, and was in the zone where other targets were becoming less and less viable. Furthermore, it would be nice to hear his opinion of what is going on today. However, I would also like to call attention to A Smart Guy and RavenRadiant for not mentioning Venture at all this cycle. (Smart Guy hasn't posted yet however) I would think that with a decent majority of people voting for Mailliw and you two sticking to your guns, you wouldn't be so fast to move on from him to other targets.

 

Edit: Typo

Edited August 25, 2015 by Araris Valerian

[RavenRadient7 she/her]

Araris, I thought I made it rather clear last day cycle that the only reason I left my vote on Venture was because I wanted to see about the worldsingers, a plan which was later abandoned, at which point I didn't see any point in changing the vote, when Mailliw already had so many votes on him. The reason I suspected Venture in the first place was because of how he said something, which someone then reminded me was his typical way of playing, thus reducing my suspicion. Thus, I haven't bothered mentioning him again, because I haven't seen him as suspicious.

[Adamir he/him]

Good point - time to completely miss the point and bandwagon Araris instead. All right, then, can everyone please post what times they will be online and active so we can decide on when to cast our final votes? I am seven hours ahead of EST, and so I'll submit my vote at 5 PM EST tomorrow evening, otherwise known as midnight here in Turkey.

 

For now, I suggest that, unless you are certain that you will not be online before Night 4 begins, everyone should retract their votes and wait for more discussion, casting them again at a pre-set time without changing them after that point. This will give Eliminators fewer opportunities to set up bandwagons. I am not trying to deprive anyone of the right to defend themselves by giving them no opportunity to change the votes - all I ask is that, if you are planning on voting for someone, share your suspicions now if you haven't already so that they can defend themselves.

 

As you can probably tell, my suspicions are equally split between Raven and Araris. I suggest we use part of this time to debate which to lynch (if either) and which to ask the assassin to murder next turn (once again, if either).

 

EDIT: After some convincing arguments, and the fact that Araris withdrew his Day 1 lynch from Stink, I am disqualifying him as a lynch target unless he does something incredibly suspicious. I've just realized that I can make good things - such as not getting lynched - sound like failures when I fit the word 'disqualify' into them.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Adamir

[Araris Valerian he/him]

@Raven: Okay, that makes sense. However (and this bit is about why I am still suspect of Venture), posting single sentences, regardless of playstyle, doesn't do much to help us, especially when the posted vote is in the range where people look at the lynch as inevitable. I was merely curious as to why that subject had been dropped by both people when it seems relevant to me still. We may not have much in the way of activity from him, but proportionally, his posts are more suspicious than anyone that has been suggested this cycle.

 

@Winter: I agree wholeheartedly, especially with the extension. Do you have any further thoughts since the post you made earlier this cycle?

 

@Adamir: So, can you outline your suspicions of me (or at least the point you already brought up)? That is, all you have really brought up was the Day 1 lynch, where I opposed STINK in his argument against the lynch. Not to mention that he changed what he was doing a few times toward the end of the cycle to match the general crowd, rather than sticking to his guns. Switching sides in an argument for the sake of appeasing a crowd is suspicious, in my opinion. (which is what I read [past tense here] STINK as doing)

 

If you are reading this STINK, hopefully you stick around for enough games to kill your killer!

Edited August 25, 2015 by Araris Valerian

[TheMightyLopen he/him]

As I am one of the more experienced players many will know that I am never very active, also that I almost never vote on the first 2-3 cycles.  Sometimes I vote only once of twice during the whole game.

 

That's only 19 roles and we have 28 players total.  I've already given my estimates on what I think the eliminators have so I won't repeat them here but I am curious as to why you think it's a good idea to speculate on what number/roles the village has.  That sort of information is something that the Eliminators are always wanting to know and the village doesn't need to know.

 

I still haven't gone through everything but at the moment Raven is the top suspect for me mostly due to what Wilson said via PM.  However Hero is also up there due to a similar play style he used another time he was an Eliminator.

 

 

O' GM of GMs, may we have a cycle extension?

 

Ok, thanks Alvron. Since you are a very experienced player I'm willing to take your word for your activity level, since if you were lying multiple people would almost assuredly point it out.

 

Also, nice job getting a cycle extension(ask and ye shall receive I guess) as we can now have a lot more discussion before we lynch someone.

 

I am officially voting against Araris Valerian due to my affirmed suspicion of Lopen and Raven. To remind everyone, Lopen was the fifth / last person to vote against Phattemer and was one of the players (with Ripple) that consistently brought up that the Eliminators might have a Worldsinger (which I am confident is false). To mirror wilson's Day 1 assessment (that can be found above, thanks Clanky) the moment some good discussion begins to develop, attention is drawn over those bordering on inactives again, which at this point in time is a very poor lead. I highly doubt Alvron is an Eliminator hiding in the shadows, for he has made no effort to mislead anyone (from what I recall) during his infrequent posts. I propose that if Araris is indeed an Eliminator, Lopen is too, and that Raven may very well be as well.

 

Alvom, first of all I would like to ask why you think that if Araris is an eliminator, me and Raven would be too. I don't understand how you think we are connected. As for my vote on Alvron I was only trying to get his thoughts on what has happened lately. I do think that Raven and Araris are suspicious but I was trying not to bandwagon so early on in the cycle because it seemed like that would hurt discussion. I didn't really think anyone else would vote for Alvron as I wasn't accusing him as much as poke voting him.

[RavenRadient7 she/her]

So far this game, I've been on when the cycle ends, when the new cycle begins, and about half an hour to an hour after that. Then, I'm off due to sleeping for the next, 8 to 9 hours after that, before jumping back on and watching the thread for more or less the rest of the cycle. Thus, if you want me to vote at a specific time for this cycle, I'll vote at a specific time at this cycle.

 

However, I will not be able to keep up this level of activity much longer. Starting on the later hours of the cycle on the 28th, I'm going to reducing my level of activity to maybe a twice a day check for the next four days or so. Afterwards, assuming I'm still alive, I should be able to check more often, but not nearly as often as before.

 

On those days, I'm intended one of my checks to be right before the end of the cycle, but it's not a guarantee that I'll be able to post, even if I can check the thread. I won't be able to consistently vote those days, for sure.

 

Otherwise, Adamir, I don't have a vote on anyone yet, so I don't mind waiting until the last moment to place a vote, if that's what we end up deciding to do.

[TheMightyLopen he/him]

I agree with Winter also. And Adamir, about my online times, I am usually on about 6 hours before the cycle ends and 7 hours after. I'm an hour behind EST I believe(I am always mixed up about time zones but I know I live in America and CST, so right now it is 7:14 PM as I'm posting this and the cycle ends at 9 PM for me.)

[Haelbarde he/him]

Just looking back at that day 1 lynch...
 
So, approaching the end of the cycle, the votes looked something like:

Wilson(1): Nobles
Stink(1): Orlok
Shallan(1): Haelbarde
Raven(1): Winter Cloud

Honey Badger(3): Mailliw, Araris, RippleGylf

Ripplegylf(3): Clanky, Raven, sart

 

 

With Ripple having voted on Honey Badger to force a tie.

 

Then Hero puts a vote on Phattemer: (dropping the rest because they don't change at all)

 

Honey Badger(3): Mailliw, Araris, RippleGylf

Ripplegylf(3): Clanky, Raven, sart

Phattemer(1): Hero

 

After discussion about lynching inactives, 10 minutes later Ripple jumps ship to Phattemer:

 

Honey Badger(2): Mailliw, Araris

Ripplegylf(3): Clanky, Raven, sart

Phattemer(2): Hero, RippleGylf

 

Then, just over an hour later, Alvom and Stink throw their votes on Phatt, with Lopen's coming in 10 minutes after that:

 

Honey Badger(2): Mailliw, Araris

Ripplegylf(3): Clanky, Raven, sart

Phattemer(2): Hero, RippleGylf, Alvom, Stink, Lopen

 

Looking through Hero, Alvom, and Lopen's posts for the game, Alvom doesn't immediately strike me as suspicious. Lopen I'm unsure of, but I think I'd tend towards he's not a conspirator. I'll probably keep an eye on him though. Hero hasn't seemed to contribute much, though I guess I should cut him slack, considering he's got a week-old baby girl.

 

Bother. I was expecting to get to the end of this with a vote for one of them. Unfortunately not, it seems.

 

A brief look at the Day 2 lynch makes me wonder about moving Adamir's vote off of Winter. I would have expected Winter to have commented on Kipper's trustworthiness after Mailliw turned out to be a Noble.

[Sart he/him]

 

Everyone! Bandwagons are pointless! 

 

Pointless! I tell you guys, it's not who we lynch but if we get information from it! Bandwagons stop the information. If the person we lynch is an eliminator, but they fell silent instead of arguing against a useless bandwagon - we lose the information we could've gained from the lynch! Bandwagons seek to stop the questions. We need to ask questions! Questions, I tell you! And cheesecake! And fires and caves! Anyway, Alcatraz references aside, why are we bandwagoning on Raven? I don't trust Raven, but I'd prefer for us to slow down and think. We have a cycle extension, let's use it instead of bandwagonning and wasting it on simply waiting for the rollover! We need to talk, to think, to discuss, to ask! We don't trust and we shouldn't trust, but without discussion, we don't know who if we do trust we should trust. So slow down. Think. 

Don't bandwagon. Please. Anything but another one. 

 

(appoligizes to all relevant parties. I do not intend to be insulting. If you do take this as insulting, I appoligize. ) 

 

Preach it sister!

This idea that bandwagons are good is frankly ludicrous. If the eliminators really cared about who we were lynching, an alternative lynch candidate would have been offered by now, or else someone would rise to the defense of Raven. If an eliminator is being threatened, you can almost guarantee that the other eliminators are going to defend them. Think about it. What's likely to draw more suspicion to the person on the block: stating that the player isn't that suspicious, or by forcibly shifting the votes away from them. Heck, I'm more worried that the eliminators will change the vote from one innocent to another, causing increased suspicion on the second person, allowing the eliminators to go another day cycle without being lynched we can not allow that to happen.

 

Adamir, we can't just stop voting. Outside of a demonic summoning ritual, the best way to get someone in the thread is by voting for them. Remember, the eliminators don't have access their doc during the day. If we start voting for one of them, we're going to get a response. It's more than likely they will make mistakes protecting their own. Voting is the best way for the village to get info. We're not likely going to get a follow the cop strategy going any time soon, so we need discussion.

 

Therefore, I have to look at where this idea of good bandwagons came from, and who's doing their best to keep it that way. In that case, I have to vote for Alvom Halbin. He's been contradicting himself. He states that he can get behind the lynch of Mailliw early in Day 2, when there's only 3 votes. Later on, closer to when Mailliw has 4 votes, he starts thinking that Mailliw is innocent. But then later on he suggests that there should be more votes on Mailliw. Notice in the final vote tally, he never actually gets around to voting for Mailliw. It just feels like he's an eliminator trying to be inconspicuous. I've been wrong on post analysis before, so I'm not claiming that he is guaranteed to be an Eliminator. However, I just can't let this type of behavior go unquestioned. If you thought that Mailliw needed to be lynched, why didn't you vote for him? If you thought he shouldn't be lynched, why didn't you vote for Venture? I still am suspicious of Venture, but I want these questions to be answered first.

 

Edit: Stupid m looking like rn

Edited August 26, 2015 by a smart guy

[Haelbarde he/him]

Vote Tally:

Raven(3): Clanky, Kipper, Adamir{2}, Macen{1}

Emerald(1): Hero

Araris(1): Adamir{1}, Alvom

Alvron(2): Lopen, Raven{1}, Sart

Venture(1): Araris

Winter(1): Hael

 

Seeing as the trend seems to be commenting on whether Raven seems suspicious, I'm reaffirming that I find Raven no more suspicious than most of the other players. I'd also like to hear Alvron respond to sart's questions. 

 

Should I get time later today (thanks for the calling the extension btw alvron), I'll see if I can put up my thoughts on all of the players so far.

 

EDIT: Spoilered rather than removed so that the next few post make sense, but so that the tally doesn't cause any further confusion.

 

Seeing as the trend seems to be commenting on whether Raven seems suspicious, I'm reaffirming that I find Raven no more suspicious than most of the other players. 

Edited August 26, 2015 by Haelbarde

[Guest]

A few of you know from PMs that I hate bandwagons (if they are done with little reasoning, that is), but for those of you who don't: I hate bandwagons. If you provide reasoning, I'm all for it, because I don't think you should be obligated to vote for a particular person. BUT, if you say something blatantly, like, "I'll join the lynchtrain," and then contradict yourself and ask for everyone to be more cautious, and give a time when they will vote, that would almost make me think that you were under outside influence, and woukd definitely make you more suspicious.

Adamir, I will be on for a while tomorrow, but in short bits, and likely just to do PMs. However, I plan to leave my vote where it is, and I doubt much discussion will change it. I think a lot before I place a vote.

An Ardent, by the way, contacted me and claimed to have Scannned me as good. I'm not going to reveal his identity as of yet. If any other Ardents exist though, it would be interesting if you would all tell me your reads of me after tonight. At least compare them through someone else trusted. That way you could begin to find out who is corrupted and who is not.

a smart guy, who is Alvorn?

[Alvron he/him]

I think your count is off Hael.  Sart voted for Alvom not Alvron.  Or at least that's what I think they were trying to do but just mispelt the name.

[RavenRadient7 she/her]

While I'm not sure who to put a vote on yet, there is one thing I think we shouldn't do this cycle: lynch an inactive. While putting a vote on them might get their attention, and get those who haven't been discussing much to come on and discuss, we're not going to get as much information from their deaths as we would from the death of a more active member. I still think that the eliminators are hiding among the active players rather than the inactive ones, and I think we'd have a better chance to get one of them, as well as more information to analyze, if we target an active player this cycle.

 

Edit: Plus, we've only lynched barely active or completely inactive players so far this game. Time to switch it up a bit.

Edited August 26, 2015 by RavenRadient7

[TheMightyLopen he/him]

Also about the vote count Hael, I removed my vote from Alvron. So instead of 2 votes for Alvron, there is one on AlvoM and none on Alvron.

[Haelbarde he/him]

Oops... apologies all. I knew I was going to make that mistake at some point...

 

Vote Tally:

Raven(3): Clanky, Kipper, Adamir{2}, Macen{1}

Emerald(1): Hero

Araris(1): Adamir{1}, Alvom

Alvron(0): Lopen{1}, Raven{1}, 

Venture(1): Araris

Alvom(1): Sart

Winter(1): Hael

 

So I will then reiterate that I would like to hear Alvom respond to Sart's questions.

 

This also tells me that I need to re-look over Alvom, Hero's and Raven's posts in more detail this time... 

[Amanuensis he/him]

@Adamir: I’m currently six hours ahead of EST (I.E. It’s 10:41 at the time of this post). Tonight is my night off, however, so I will likely be going out with some of my housemates.

 

@Lopen: My suspicion began on Day 1 when you came in last minute to vote against Phatt. On its own I didn’t think much of it, other than it was overkill. However you, along with Ripple, were one of the few who were insistent on adding as many votes on one person as possible to prevent manipulation. Considering it was Day 1 we would have gained a lot more information if we kept it at a tie so that we could see if the Eliminators did indeed have a Worldsinger and if so who did they favor. I voted for Phatt towards the end, not knowing that Stink would immediately piggy back on me considering our constant back and forth, let alone you. Looking back to find that previous quote, I also saw this post and this one where you state twice that you will be gone but back just in time to vote, without providing any ideas or explanation as to your vote (other than the aforementioned prevention of vote manipulation). Given how much ripple advocated that we needed to ensure the Eliminators could not use their Worldsinger, I theorized that they have none and it was very possible that she wasn’t the only one on their team trying to protect that weakness from being discovered.

 

As for Raven’s connection to this, in this post by wilson she illustrates her suspicions of both Mail and Raven. She discusses how Raven was the one who recommended lynching inactives during a productive conversation about suspicious actives. Ripple immediately jumped onto this, which could very well have been an attempt to save herself, but also she could have been following an ally’s lead.

 

Now, in a similar way to Day 1, accusations were placed on both Raven and Araris. Not too long after you appear, once again bringing attention to an inactive. I then looked back at Alvron’s posts to see if anything he did came off as suspicious, and not a single thing stood out. Immediately in my head I likened this to the same situation as Day 1. In this post by Wilson during Day 2, she explains why it’s very possible that by ripple’s sudden vote off of Honey that one of the two others who voted against him could be an Eliminator. She chose to focus on Mallan due to his previous inconsistencies, but he turned out to be innocent. The other voter was Araris. She also fleshes out my theory of them not having a Worldsinger and how if they didn’t both Stink and Lopen rise is suspicion considerably. Given that Stink turned out to be innocent, that leaves only Lopen.

 

How do these dots connect in my mind? Alvron votes against Araris. I don’t vote yet but express my agreement. The next vote is Lopen against Alvron, on the account of being both experienced and fairly inactive. Next Raven steps up to place a vote on him as well, putting him in the lead. I take a look at all of the posts of those involved, and what I just reiterated coalesces.

 

In the same post by raven she mentions that it's likely the Eliminators are hiding somewhere in the middle of active and inactive. This both could have been a defense orchestrated by herself since she has thus far been among the more active players, however, it's important to note that both Araris and Lopen fit into that in between category.

 

@a smart guy: I said that I could get behind a lynch on Mailli because I both had my own suspicions of him (based on an interaction where I tried to refrain from stating the name of a player who sent me a private message asking for my role yet he repeatedly insisted it was Stink and not him, which came off to me as extremely unnecessary) and I trusted a bit too much in wilson’s opinions.  The reason why I had second thoughts was because Venture was among those who I was suspicious of and keeping an eye out for but had not nearly posted enough to affirm them. Lastly, I did not say there should be more votes on Mailli specifically. I had completely forgotten about Con Artists and that they had gained the Worldsinger ability from the previous days lynch. Prior to that realization I was all for inciting a tie, and if you look at the wording of my post I was asking what everyone else’s opinions were on it. I by no means said let’s do this! I am unsure of why Clanky and Honey jumped on it so fast, however. I will note the odd wording used in their posts (for example, “voting shenanigans"). 

 

 

 

I hope this clarifies my thought process.

Edited August 26, 2015 by Alvom Halbin

[TheMightyLopen he/him]

Alvom, I don't know why you keep saying I was "insistent" about the eliminator worldsinger thing as that one post was the only one where I said anything about it except when I said I had made a mistake thinking that way. As for my reasons about me being gon, but back in time to vote, at the time of the 1st post something had just come up and I wasn't sure if I would be back to help with what I thought would be a good idea at the time(widening the vote gap). The second post I was still busy but I knew I would be able to get back on in time so I was just confirming that, as I try to be consistent in my actions.

 

On to my vote about Alvron. I've already explained that my vote on him was more of a poke vote than trying to get him lynched. As you said, nothing he's posted so far seems suspicious, so I didn't think anyone else would vote for him.

 

Thank you for explaining your thoughts as I don't like being lumped together with the top 2 lynch targets for the day with little to no explanation.

[Haelbarde he/him]

My brain's not working right now, so I'll respond to your comment later, though my question was more relating to this comment you made earlier. We have the result, but I don't recall you bring up again to discuss now that we have more information. Edit: I said my brain wasn't working, didn't I. Realizes that your comments on Kipper were actually what I was asking you to discuss. Doh!

 

Re: Kipper. I had similar thoughts, but was going to hold off on commenting till later, to see if anything further suspicious popped up. 

Edited August 26, 2015 by Haelbarde