Long Game 73: The Forgotten Coup

[Ashbringer he/him]

I... don’t know if I have?

I was only in that one Among Us game where Burnt could see dead people chat, and I could not keep voices straight at all. And I didn’t... talk.

[---]

Currently ISOing ash (smh I think he's village smh) and ash i just responded to your post, and you only respond to the part that is completely non-game related? honestly don't appreciate that much :P. woulda been nice if you responded to the other things too. You said it yourself that Chaos != Uselessness so I don't see that as a good excuse to avoid this.

(also talking about Chaos != uselessness I sincerely apologize to pyro (like he's ever gonna see this :P.) for tryna kill him because he was chaotic smh who am I to talk)

P.S.

if the other person who used forbiddance doesn't wanna come out in thread d'ya wanna come to me :D.

honestly I don't see the point because either the Elims hit you or they didn't downside to claiming in thread is people knowing that you might not have a chalk, but also it's a complete maybe so I also don't see that as a good point either? idk.

Edited February 1, 2021 by Illwei

[Ashbringer he/him]

Hmm. Let's see, then,

Day 1:

Spoiler

 

Night 1:

Spoiler

 

Day 2:

Spoiler

19 hours ago, Illwei said:

• Also me talking about Vigor was just for fun like I wanted to grab vigor so the elims wouldn't have it ya know (huh sounds like something an Elim would say, huh? :P) and then I ended up not submitting an action. I was gonna do something tonight and then I- I didn't? so I also forgot to submit an action tonight hehe! (I swear I'm not just saying things please TJ back me up here) anyways yeah.
• Also just remembered: Just because I was going for the Vigor book don't mean I didn't start with vigor. just means I didn't want someone else to get it.

18 hours ago, Illwei said:

18 hours ago, Ashbringer said:

If you only wanted Vigor so the Elims couldn't, knowing your own Villageness, why didn't you submit an action?

If you didn't submit an action, why did you half-accuse Books of taking "your" Vigor Book?

And why didn't you mention either when I asked during the night?

1) because I'm an idiot

2) To see how people would react

3) because night

16 hours ago, Illwei said:

 - Ash, who basically stated intent to vote Illwei during the night for legit suspicious contradictory things I've said

4 hours ago, Illwei said:

Illwei responding to Archer's post of reasons-to-suspect Illwei

 

 - Cagey answers (can I get quotes pretty please
 - Insonsistancies (Do ya mean the vigor book? already explained that, even talked to striker about it last turn. ask him. also thought I talked to you about it too? I'd have to double check our PM)
 -  Connie thing (that was a fish, which in some way worked because I now thing you and connie aren't e/e. didn't ever intend to want connie to die :P.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

... okay, CTRL+enter = Post, apparently. We'll Be Right Back!

Edited February 1, 2021 by Ashbringer

[---]

very informative post yes yes

Edited February 1, 2021 by Illwei

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

20 hours ago, Quinn0928 said:

Huh. Well, it appears I wasn't the only one who used a Line of Forbiddance then. I didn't ask that : P

Pretty sure this means that if you could have been the only LoF and have gotten attacked, but I doubt the elims would have attacked you given how much you were indicating that you would self-protect.

TJ has not contradicted Quinn's claim of 3 defense, so we're sticking with that and Matrim, Kas, and Order as the protectors. Matrim promised to tell Ash about having an item ~7 hours before rollover which is probably related to Ash deciding to join a vote saving Mat. I doubt this would be an E/E ploy so early; better to get a villager on your side if Mat was evil, elim!Mat wouldn't want to commit to spending a chalk to cover up a fake acid bucket when other options were available, and self-contained evil loop probably could have avoided using an acid bucket, so I'd guess that Matrim at the very least is telling the truth about using acid.

Elim!Illwei probably wouldn't start a new train on Dannex if Gears and Matrim are both village. They could have voted for either if the other was evil up until she made the post about Striker being more suspicious of Mat, after which it would have been hard to vote for him. Anytime before that a vote for Matrim would have been accepted.

[Quintessential she/her]

17 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

Pretty sure this means that if you could have been the only LoF and have gotten attacked, but I doubt the elims would have attacked you given how much you were indicating that you would self-protect.

I am... slightly confused by the grammar in the first part of this sentence. And yeah, I realize in retrospect that they likely wouldn't attack me--unless they're fond of being meta and are thinking "maybe she won't actually self-protect and will just let the idea of it protect her" or whatever, but that's dumb and tinfoily so ignore me--but in the moment I wasn't... idk what I was thinking. I do wish I still had that Chalk : P

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

2 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

I am... slightly confused by the grammar in the first part of this sentence.

Sart said that someone using a LoF wouldn't be informed if they blocked a kill, and you responded that someone else must have also drawn a LoF when it was possible that you were the only one who had.

[Quintessential she/her]

Just now, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

Sart said that someone using a LoF wouldn't be informed if they blocked a kill, and you responded that someone else must have also drawn a LoF when it was possible that you were the only one who had.

The phrasing of the question he answered was "If I block a kill with my Line of Forbiddance, will I be informed?" I didn't ask that question, or any version of it, since I figured the answer was no. And given the phrasing, someone was definitely at least thinking about drawing that Line at some point. Can confirm that Sart doesn't answer rules clarification questions in PMs, so that person wouldn't have known the answer to that until just now. (also whoever asked that question is almost certainly village since there are no kills that the elims would need to block right now). Obviously speculation and not well-founded (and now that I've said it reads vil, anyone could try to claim they were the one who asked in order to gain vil credit). But yeah. That was my thought process behind that.

[Devotary of Spontaneity]

2 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

The phrasing of the question he answered was "If I block a kill with my Line of Forbiddance, will I be informed?" I didn't ask that question, or any version of it, since I figured the answer was no. And given the phrasing, someone was definitely at least thinking about drawing that Line at some point.

I see, so you're thinking it was someone who drew a LoF who asked that question and not just someone like Kas who wanted to know if protects/roleblocks showed up in the writeup.

[Ashbringer he/him]

Hmm. Let's see, then. (Take two)

Day 1:

Spoiler

Quote

I'm actually gonna

Ashbringer

i think, even tho...no! I do not claim responsibility for his death in QF50. I grant Striker that. :P.

Where it all started. Or, at least, a useful context.

Quote

Woke up to lots of posts! yey!!! wish I was here for this as I am (having just woke up) really not ...absorbing? Just- I'm having trouble thinking so If I say anything suspicious here I am not responsible :P.

I read through this and it was addressed. I'll also say this later- but Mat seems overly fixated on this one point. I don't think that's AI, but as it goes on it feels like an Elim who is annoyed that he's getting called out for something that shouldn't exist.

Either way, if this was the case, I agree. This isn't the case, but if it were, he'd be right :P. It does look like, In Striker's post, that he's going after Matrim for having any reasoning, which is normally a village tell- trying to conjure up reasoning outta nowhere to actually start the discussion. When Striker tried to have that discussion though, Matrim locked on to striker so- idk.

Wait okay my quotes didn't go in order what anyways this quote is off topic :P.

but anyways- not why I personally like being Elim btw :P. I feel like you still have to read people- not for alignments and whatnot though. just tin general :P.  Also I like the scheming. Definitely don't like being elim because I think it's 'easier' :P.

I mean, not everyone plays elim like you, Quinn :P. don't judge people off of your own meta :P.

Why did I quote this? ...

Ah, yes. this.

"I shouldn't be killed for having reasoning alone"

This is what really really really sounds like an Elim. An elim who knows he should be caught, but not for this reason. Because I agree, having reasoning shouldn't be the reason someone is killed, when I stand by my statement that even having bad reasoning reads more village to me, early on.

It's a bit early huh for self pres votes?

I

I don't like this? I don't- I'm having trouble thinking here. but I don't like this?

Meta reasoning is not the only valid reasoning in the early game. What mat did, as I've said, is completely valid. Meta reasoning doesn't start useful discussions. other reasoning does. maybe little of substance had been said, but that's why you have to start saying something sometime. I'd also argue that there actually had been things of substance said. Had Alv and gears not posted their bits? had people not started (slowly) talking?

Either way, Mat trying to find reasoning that isn't there just...isn't AI? not on D1? because that's what we're trying to do? that's the only thing we can do?

Quoting mainly because the tone here seems... quite different then the tone of Illwei today. Not sure why.

Quote

Hi

psa

if ur voting someone based off of ur meta i kindly ask you to take a step back and remember they rn't u

maybe u think that its a general elim thing which is different but if ur like "aw man id do this" then take a step back maybe look and see if other ppl would do it too and then if they would come back in full force or whatnot

just remember not everyone plays the same so yeah

or maybe like, give some reasoning as to why you would do that as an elim, give some thoughts behind it. that would also work ye

tank u

also book of vigor is mine no one else better take it

First in-thread mention of the Book of Vigor by Illwei. At all. This is the important one here.

Quote

Posted Saturday at 12:56 PM ·

I am. So. Completely lost. Right now.

I donno. I donno what I think. I donno.

Dannex Has been extremely quiet tho. that's not the Danex I know.

Timestamp of the Dannex vote, for other context. My vote came at 5:33, so... about four and a half hours later...

Quote

Posted Saturday at 05:45 PM

Someone else

wanna save this

in the last bit

unless you think that the Elim team is me, Burnt, Ash, Mat, which is....I guess a possibility ya know

...however, Illwei was there for the ending and Dannex's eventual execution.

Night 1:

Spoiler

Quote

Smh books grabbed my book of vigor I am extremely insulted

EDIT:

wait and someone didn't leave it a tie i'm ashamed of yall

ALSO:

@Flyingbooks man why d'ya take the book of vigor ;-;

Illwei re-expressing desire for the Vigor book. Twice. No reason why she wanted it yet.

Quote

Book of vigor makes it so that your targets don't know they were blocked. I honestly see zero use of this to the village. Someone tell me if I'm missing something, but as a villager I'd kinda want my targets to know they were roleblocked. it would prevent me from having to claim as the one who actually roleblocked them, and they wouldn't be sitting there trying to figure out what the problem was while they're the problem all along.

And here we go. The contradiction. Buckle in everyone...

Quote

QUINN:

Ah. Right. That... makes sense. Though I would still say it's NAI for a villager to take the Book just to keep elims from having it. After all, we're allowed to choose not to use our Specializations if we want to.

Edit: I phrased that poorly XD I would say it's NAI because a villager might take the book just to keep the elims from having it.

 

ILLWEI:

I'm getting a general village read on Books rn, but that's purely meta, as they haven't done anything... (cough, meta, cough) :P.

But also I was hoping that they would get on and talk, because I asked people not to go for Vigor and now I'm sad ;-; does this mean Striker doesn't trust me or that Books doesn't trust Striker? who knows! well, I mean, they know :P.

Illwei states the previous, but also has a Good read on Books, which is interesting. And AGAIN, even after saying a Villager would have no use of the Vigor Book, she expresses sadness that she lost the book to Books.

Quote

ASH:

Make up your mind.

Along with quotes from above. Pointing out their inherent contradiction.

Quote

  On 1/31/2021 at 1:36 PM, Ashbringer said:

It’s not really a “waste” of chalk if it’s specialized Revocation, as they’d now have my chalk. It just means that I don’t get any.

  On 1/31/2021 at 1:41 PM, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

If you and a revoker are both village, it is a waste since it goes from two pieces of chalk (yours and theirs) to one piece of chalk (the one that used to be yours). With a village revoker and elim you it wouldn't be a waste since you wouldn't have done anything productive with that chalk anyway in that case.

:thonk:

Ash what are you implying here

Illwei's next response is to me discussing my loss of chalk. Not what I quoted her on.

Quote

ASH:

If you want to talk about implications, respond to the post where I quoted you three times.

ILLWEI:

Whaddo I got to respond to there? You pointed out three things I said, yeah I said them, whattaboutit?

ASH:

They contradict each other. Explain your reasoning please.

Back and forth. No progress. Night passes. I would think my worry would be evident.

Day 2:

Spoiler

19 hours ago, Illwei said:

• Also me talking about Vigor was just for fun like I wanted to grab vigor so the elims wouldn't have it ya know (huh sounds like something an Elim would say, huh? :P) and then I ended up not submitting an action. I was gonna do something tonight and then I- I didn't? so I also forgot to submit an action tonight hehe! (I swear I'm not just saying things please TJ back me up here) anyways yeah.
• Also just remembered: Just because I was going for the Vigor book don't mean I didn't start with vigor. just means I didn't want someone else to get it.

See following. Also, why and how could TJ "back you up" on not submitting an action?

18 hours ago, Illwei said:

18 hours ago, Ashbringer said:

If you only wanted Vigor so the Elims couldn't, knowing your own Villageness, why didn't you submit an action?

If you didn't submit an action, why did you half-accuse Books of taking "your" Vigor Book?

And why didn't you mention either when I asked during the night?

1) because I'm an idiot

2) To see how people would react

3) because night

None of these count as "explanations".

16 hours ago, Illwei said:

 - Ash, who basically stated intent to vote Illwei during the night for legit suspicious contradictory things I've said

If you saw it, why not respond to it during the night? 

4 hours ago, Illwei said:

Illwei responding to Archer's post of reasons-to-suspect Illwei

 - Illwei has been bad under pressure (psh I've been doing great under pressure smh :P)
 - Cagey answers (can I get quotes pretty please
 - Insonsistancies (Do ya mean the vigor book? already explained that, even talked to striker about it last turn. ask him. also thought I talked to you about it too? I'd have to double check our PM)
 -  Connie thing (that was a fish, which in some way worked because I now thing you and connie aren't e/e. didn't ever intend to want connie to die :P.)

We don't have a PM. 

I'm in one of your group PMs. This was never mentioned, not outright.

Also, "baiting" here again.

1 hour ago, Illwei said:

 - Ash, who is still confused about the vigor book

basically I don't like Ash off of this? no clue what Archer thinks he's done good for the village so I guess I'll wait for that because Ash is focusing so hard on that vigor book smh.

Chaos go brr. I found a thread; I'm going to follow it.

1 hour ago, Illwei said:

2 hours ago, Archer said:

This only applies to Random. If anyone else does it, I will make you justify it.

Archer

I don't like this vote. It looks like Illwei's trying to needle Archer, but it's far too convenient as a self-preservation vote or a suspicion vote. (This is probably me tunneling, but I think it is worth noting.

50 minutes ago, Illwei said:

57 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

You never gave me a straight answer. You’ve given “baiting” and “I forgot” as replacements for explanations far too many times for my liking.

I wanted book to keep it from elims, i say things in thread because the things i had said to people in PMs were getting nowhere and everyone was kinda like "oh ok" when i was like "ye I want that vigor book" which was kinda strange (lookin' at u, Archer :eyes:) and then so i say things in thread just to say them you know I don't need a plan all the time ya know I'm pretty much doing whatever this game ya know

I legit said both of those words a total of once :P. in one post :P.

 

was looking through ur posts I found this

Quote

• Evil: Illwei (refusing to explain shifting super-Vigor stance)

and like just wanna clarify was not ever shifting? I was like "This isn't a village book" and then I was like "imma take this book yall back off" and then I was like "this isn't a village book" (haha.  pun?) so ye. the first one happened in a PM but striker can confirm it's there. pretty sure Archer can too. so like, was not ever shifting.

What you said in PMs is irrelevant to me, as this is the first I've heard about them. So no, this is a shift. This is a large shift in your in-thread stance, with nothing to back it up.

Also, baiting in two different places, at least. And both times someone (me or Archer) called you out on it. You baited, we bit.

In short, Illwei, if you've explained yourself here I don't see it. It really feels like you deflected the issue and then counted that as explaining it. Well, I don't get it. Can you show me where in here you've explained?

 

I will say, looking through here, that I feel at least one or probably two of Mat, Illwei, Striker, and Archer have to be evil. 

[Quintessential she/her]

28 minutes ago, Devotary of Spontaneity said:

I see, so you're thinking it was someone who drew a LoF who asked that question and not just someone like Kas who wanted to know if protects/roleblocks showed up in the writeup.

Well, if you think about it:

If I assume that this question was asked before rollover, as a general question about how LoFs work... well, that really doesn't make sense, actually, since normally it's announced in the write-up who's been attacked even if they do survive due to protection (as opposed to roleblocking). So you would know that your protection blocked a kill--I for one was assuming it would work that way this game. So unless it was someone who'd played/read the previous run of this game? If it worked that way? In which case they would be asking about the write-up? But then it wouldn't be asking about the write-up because they'd already know the answer to that question.

Either way, now that I think about it I'm pretty sure the question was asked after rollover, once we'd seen that no one died. But then whether it refers to the write-up is irrelevant, because the only person who'd ask something like that is someone who drew a Line (notice the phrasing "my Line of Forbiddance") and wanted to know whether they were responsible for the lack of a kill. So yeah, I'm assuming they weren't asking about the write-up, or at least if they were it was because they'd drawn that Line.

22 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

We don't have a PM. 

I believe Illwei meant Archer when she said "you". Since he was the person she was responding to with that post.

 

[Ashbringer he/him]

37 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

I believe Illwei meant Archer when she said "you". Since he was the person she was responding to with that post.

... oh. Right.

Still, I haven't heard anything about it from PMs.

 

It's also possible an Elim asked that question, confused on whether you used Forbiddance or that someone managed to roleblock them. Seeing as I've heard nothing about a roleblock, I'm assuming the first. Either that or the Elims decided not to submit a kill, which I could see them doing in one scenario.

... I need to be more chaotic.

[Quintessential she/her]

4 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

It's also possible an Elim asked that question, confused on whether you used Forbiddance or that someone managed to roleblock them. Seeing as I've heard nothing about a roleblock, I'm assuming the first. Either that or the Elims decided not to submit a kill, which I could see them doing in one scenario.

emphasis mine

Ashbringer Uhhhh what? First of all--yes, I suppose it could have been an elim asking the question if Sart rephrased it (which I suspect he did since now that I think about it he's rephrased some of my questions). But why would... we don't know whether I was the target? Either you seriously messed up your phrasing there or that was an elim slip.

[---]

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

[1]See following. Also, [2]why and how could TJ "back you up" on not submitting an action?

[1]

Explaination 1.

"I wanted to grab vigor so the elims wouldn't have it ya know "

:).

[2] See QF50 and the GM spreadsheet >>

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

None of these count as "explanations".

Uh, yeah they do??? I like, explicitly answered the questions you asked?

Q1. "If you only wanted Vigor so the Elims couldn't, knowing your own Villageness, why didn't you submit an action?"
> A. "because I'm an idiot" - An idiot, who didn't submit her actions.

Q2. "If you didn't submit an action, why did you half-accuse Books of taking "your" Vigor Book?"
> A. "To see how people would react" - like you are rn. see: 'fish, bait'

Q3. "And why didn't you mention either when I asked during the night?"
> A. "because night" - Er, okay this one needed more probably :P. it was night, and I didn't wanna talk about it til the cycle was over really. I wanted to see who died. and. unfortunately no one did. :P.

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

If you saw it, why not respond to it during the night? 

see: "because night"

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

We don't have a PM. 

er, that post was a response to Archer.

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

Also, "baiting" here again.

Yeah, this is also not related to the whole vigor book thing :P. but yes, baiting. see: "like 85% of what I do is for reactions" pretty sure I've said it somewhere at some point :P. Archer told me what theoretically is the contents of his PM with connie because of some things, I'd say I'm satisfied.

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

Chaos go brr. I found a thread; I'm going to follow it.

Yeah I have no clue what you're searching for here? uh, this was a question to Archer? so, whatever.

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

I don't like this vote. It looks like Illwei's trying to needle Archer, but it's far too convenient as a self-preservation vote or a suspicion vote. (This is probably me tunneling, but I think it is worth noting.

Lmao
archer be like: No one is allowed to naked vote on me!
Illwei: Naked votes Archer
Ash: Illwei that vote is suspicious

??? :P.

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

What you said in PMs is irrelevant to me, as this is the first I've heard about them. So no, this is a shift. This is a large shift in your in-thread stance, with nothing to back it up.

Yeah shouldn't be irrelevant to you. different stance in thread? kinda looks like that ig, but like, also not really? I can't be objective on myself because I"m me, ofc, but like

 - Illwei goes after Vigor book
 - Illwei tells people to not take her vigor book
 - Illwei goes after books for taking the vigor book because that's an Elim thing to do, and explains she wanted to take it to make sure Elims didn't

I don't see the contradictions. I don't.

and if for some reason you think I came up with the whole "haha i took it so Elims couldn't!" when you thought i was like caught or something, I should have two PMs, funnily enough the two other people actually voting on me, that have me stating reasoning early D1.

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

Also, baiting in two different places, at least. And both times someone (me or Archer) called you out on it. You baited, we bit.

Yeah you did, that's like, the whole point.

Did not intend for you to turn this into a tunnel but here we are :P.

P.S.

oh, conclusion. yeah. that first post there basically, the like, first two posts? those were both. explainations.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Illwei

[Ashbringer he/him]

8 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

emphasis mine

Ashbringer Uhhhh what? First of all--yes, I suppose it could have been an elim asking the question if Sart rephrased it (which I suspect he did since now that I think about it he's rephrased some of my questions). But why would... we don't know whether I was the target? Either you seriously messed up your phrasing there or that was an elim slip.

You’re the only one who’s claimed using Forbiddence...

The entire point of me saying that an Elim may have asked the question is that everyone’s assuming someone else used Forbiddence. I think any Villager who did would probably feel safe claiming so. So yes, I believe you were attacked last night. Unless anyone wants to step forward to contest that.

[Quintessential she/her]

Just now, Ashbringer said:

You’re the only one who’s claimed using Forbiddence...

The entire point of me saying that an Elim may have asked the question is that everyone’s assuming someone else used Forbiddence. I think any Villager who did would probably feel safe claiming so. So yes, I believe you were attacked last night. Unless anyone wants to step forward to contest that.

The elims may have decided not to attack at all. To cause confusion, to keep us from getting any more info, to keep the number of people who could be mix'd as high as possible, or to use their actions to get items from the Supply instead. Also it's already been said multiple times that they were unlikely to attack me because anyone paying much attention could tell I was planning to protect myself. 

But fine. Ashbringer

[---]

I still stand by that we could not kill today and see how the night goes :P.

[Quintessential she/her]

Just now, Illwei said:

I still stand by that we could not kill today and see how the night goes :P.

No vote-minimum. Someone random would die. 

[---]

5 minutes ago, Quinn0928 said:

No vote-minimum. Someone random would die. 

kay then nevermind! hehe

Edited February 2, 2021 by Illwei

[Quintessential she/her]

5 minutes ago, Illwei said:

kay then nevermind! hehe

: P yeah we had this conversation D1

[---]

Right yeah last thing for my big post response to ash or whatnot:

 - First of all, went back to read D1 and N1 in the quotes and your "this sounds different" I mean I feel like that first post also sounds very different than the second and third of the day that you quoted :P.

 - Also

This is like, stupid reasoning and I know yall are like, gonna be like "wow Illwei just said that huh? /vote illwei" or whatnot but like

Ash

Your argument revolves around me

basically intentionally outing myself

as an Elim

and I know like, I've only had one Elim game

but like

you really think? that I'd? do that?

Like this isn't reasoning because I can't self meta and be like "I just wouldn't do that as an Elim" because that's the stupidest defense in the books

but like

what?

 

[Ashbringer he/him]

Okay, let's see here.

10 minutes ago, Illwei said:

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

[1]See following. Also, [2]why and how could TJ "back you up" on not submitting an action?

[1]

Explaination 1.

"I wanted to grab vigor so the elims wouldn't have it ya know "

:).

[2] See QF50 and the GM spreadsheet >>

My main problem is that "explanation" didn't come into the thread until over 24 hours after you said you couldn't see why a Villager should have it.

Are you trying to... use you forgetting actions in the QF to show you could forget actions here? That... makes some level of sense, but also no. For one thing, double the time. For another, you repeatedly stated your intentions. But... eh. Sure.

13 minutes ago, Illwei said:

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

None of these count as "explanations".

Uh, yeah they do??? I like, explicitly answered the questions you asked?

Q1. "If you only wanted Vigor so the Elims couldn't, knowing your own Villageness, why didn't you submit an action?"
> A. "because I'm an idiot" - An idiot, who didn't submit her actions.

Q2. "If you didn't submit an action, why did you half-accuse Books of taking "your" Vigor Book?"
> A. "To see how people would react" - like you are rn. see: 'fish, bait'

Q3. "And why didn't you mention either when I asked during the night?"
> A. "because night" - Er, okay this one needed more probably :P. it was night, and I didn't wanna talk about it til the cycle was over really. I wanted to see who died. and. unfortunately no one did. :P.

Let me rephrase. These are quite unsatisfying explanations . To put it simply, I don't really believe you. I remember LG69, and I'm getting a very similar vibe of I don't know what Illwei is doing but it's not good here. So I was hunting for a continuation of the reasoning and that was just... not enough to be helpful.

1) Maybe. That's not really provable either way. There's a little suspicion that you just said that as an attempt to push away your past intentions of grabbing the book - your exact words weren't "forgot to" but "ended up not" - but that's tinfoiling even for me.

2) Well, I reacted, and you did absolutely nothing with it during the night. Then both I and Archer pointed out things you said last cycle (with Striker playing both), and both times you stated that the things that we were suspicious of were "baiting". Well, to continue the bad fishing analogy, you cast your bait, we fish bit, and then... you just let the line out more? You didn't do anything with it that I can see. Which makes me very nervous that you're just saying that you were baiting as an attempt to move suspicion away.

3) ... this is something I see people doing, but I don't really get at all. Why? Why are you and people in general scared to talk about suspicions during the night? Because to me it just seemed that without a vote to pressure that you weren't going to say anything, and I was quite worried that if I died then no one would push the issue and you would just let it be in the past.

31 minutes ago, Illwei said:

1 hour ago, Ashbringer said:

I don't like this vote. It looks like Illwei's trying to needle Archer, but it's far too convenient as a self-preservation vote or a suspicion vote. (This is probably me tunneling, but I think it is worth noting.

Lmao
archer be like: No one is allowed to naked vote on me!
Illwei: Naked votes Archer
Ash: Illwei that vote is suspicious

??? :P.

More so suspicious in that Illwei voting Archer there makes... too much sense. He's suspicious of you, you're suspicious of him, and I believe he has a few votes from other people as well. A perfect vote for self-preservation or even in complaint of poor reasoning. And yet, you did it in such a nonsensical way.

I guess what I'm saying is is that you had plenty of actual reason to vote Archer, but did it (or made it look like) a joke.

35 minutes ago, Illwei said:

2 hours ago, Ashbringer said:

What you said in PMs is irrelevant to me, as this is the first I've heard about them. So no, this is a shift. This is a large shift in your in-thread stance, with nothing to back it up.

Yeah shouldn't be irrelevant to you. different stance in thread? kinda looks like that ig, but like, also not really? I can't be objective on myself because I"m me, ofc, but like

 - Illwei goes after Vigor book
 - Illwei tells people to not take her vigor book
 - Illwei goes after books for taking the vigor book because that's an Elim thing to do, and explains she wanted to take it to make sure Elims didn't

I don't see the contradictions. I don't.

and if for some reason you think I came up with the whole "haha i took it so Elims couldn't!" when you thought i was like caught or something, I should have two PMs, funnily enough the two other people actually voting on me, that have me stating reasoning early D1.

The problem is, the bolded part was told twenty-four hours later than the rest, far after I had already started pushing for an explanation. Take that part out, and the contradiction is obvious. At least, obvious to those not involved in PMs where you may or may not have discussed this plan. Which would include me.

And so far nothing you've said in PMs has come up in thread. That, and I'm rather suspicious of Archer and Striker as well. Striker more a potential teammate, Archer more gut. So I'm not sure if I would take either at their word if they now came and said "oh yeah Illwei said that she had reasons for going for Vigor a while ago". Plus the fact that the more you discuss that you're going to take a specific action, the more it looks worse for you that you didn't take it...

Still, it can't hurt. @Archer, @StrikerEZ, can you confirm that Illwei mentioned to you that she intended to grab the Book of Vigor to keep it out of the hands of the Elims "early D1"?

 

29 minutes ago, Illwei said:

Ash

Your argument revolves around me

basically intentionally outing myself

as an Elim

and I know like, I've only had one Elim game

but like

you really think? that I'd? do that?

Like I said, I can't tell what you're doing. I'm not good at reading your alignment, but I can usually figure out your intentions. I couldn't in LG69. I can't now. So... intentionally? Probably not. But maybe.

 

Thanks for responding. I should do this tinfoily ISO more often... it's fun. Not the type of chaotic I was looking for, but perhaps the type of chaotic I needed.

[Condensation she/her]

12 hours ago, Ventyl said:

I would just like to say I think @Condensation is thief due to some interesting things in PMs, such as them taking a Spring-powered crowd and then reacting very interestingly when I told them it was thiefy. 

Hmm? Please go back to ignoring me.

Not sure how to feel about that fact that all y'all seem to be leaving me off of your reads list.

[Ashbringer he/him]

Feel like Araris

[Quintessential she/her]

10 minutes ago, Ashbringer said:

Thanks for responding. I should do this tinfoily ISO more often... it's fun. Not the type of chaotic I was looking for, but perhaps the type of chaotic I needed.

XD yes it is, isn't it? Now you see why I like tinfoil so much huh No, as a matter of fact I'm not gonna stop bringing it up.

Edited February 2, 2021 by Quinn0928