ROMS XVIII: Writing On The Wall [Rogue TKO]

[OOC]

Just a brief note as I'm a bit tired.

What stands out to me most is that Riku appears very cautious, and I don't like the way Lief is pushing the Set's/Duck connection. These two are probably my top suspects at the moment.


Just because there are more than one doesn't mean the rogues won't ban someone who might be more dangerous to one of them than to the other.

I'm going to look at this again tomorrow when I'm more awake

(OOC)
I agree that balancing character with actual gameplay is quite tricky. I'm planning on trying to get my thoughts down and any actions being the way my character would behave. So 'color' is the character.

(Not OOC)

Madame Luvessy, I do admire the way you speak, it reminds me quite a bit of a dwarfed little fellow I know.

I am quite curious as to why you were quick to point out that our recently departed fellow was not the only quiet guest on Day 1. If indeed I stumbled on the reason for his demise, why would you be so quick to point out that he was not the only one who was disposable for reasons naught but lack of information? It seems as if you would be painting a target on your back; a dare, if you will. Or is it that you have another reason in mind, and so you wished to discredit my theory?

Having read our feline Wrecker's replies to questioning, I can see why she would place me on the list. I have a penchant for at least trying to be fair, even if I run afoul of the technical laws on occasion. (Such is the hazards of my life. I must go where and do what my uncle says, he is, after all, the boss, and well, I'd hate to be relegated to latrine duty after finally graduating.)

Ah, yes, I have found my little friend, and she is safely in her warm little nest once more. I apologize profusely for her adventuring, and I hope no one was startled too much by her. For such a small creature, she is quite deadly should she wish. She seems to be putting on a bit of weight, I must really speak to her owner about that...

No one said much yesterday, dere had to have been a reason for Sets' ban oder dan he didn't say much.

Wrecker leaving names off de list caud my attention as it did oders.


I tink dis may be too weak.

I am undecided on Riku, I saw no evil in his posts so far, but I do not know de power of wizards. Rafiki should consider all possibilities and not jump to conclusions.

Matter of fact, I'll put my curiosity to the test.

Vote: Crazymg

I can't really say much except that the most recent Rafiki post set off alarm bells. It's a gut call, but sometimes a girl's gotta do...

You said a number of people were suspicious because they fit certain criteria. When asked about others that fit the criteria you chose, you said you would prefer not to talk about it. Yeah, objective criteria are interesting and could provide starting points, but when you leave people off and refuse to discuss why, that becomes more interesting than your initial list. It then becomes you using a logical starting point to try and push specific people for some reason. Why? I dunno, you wouldn't talk about it.


Absolutely. Indubitably. "Then again, I considered and it might be just because he hasn't been banned early recently (or at all)."


You do now, I suppose. At the time, you had a list of people who may have reasons for banning Sets, or it could have been anyone, whatever.


Reasons are good.

Things like certain things they say or ways they talk that they could stop doing if they were pointed out. Or perhaps a potential rogue axis spotted that could then be avoided (or perpetuated to frame an innocent). Sharing information and ideas is, of course, important, but sometimes withholding it can have its merits too. There are evils among us, after all. I won't deny you have a point, though, and I won't be dismissing every reluctance to share as a null tell. I'm just not worried about this one.

[Now I have to go to campus for crap, I'm sorryyyy, I'm a terrible playerrrr.]

<OOC: I've been slowly losing a fight with a migraine since last night, so no color for you. As my thoughts are fragmented, I am going to summarize what appears to be the high points from toDay.

Wrecker opens by saying that "Riku, Tae, Joly, Luv, and Leif" might have thought Setsusa enough of a threat to ban him the first night, but that it could also have just been that he hadn't been an early ban recently. She votes Riku.

Marinated quotes Bunny's color text where she says she's not going to rush to a vote she's not feeling, but she'll be happy to vote when she has suspicions, suggesting that this is somehow Bunny trying to "dissuade us from looking too closely at" her. She votes Bunny, acknowledging that it's a weak reasoning.

I posted some color text, the substance of which was "I assumed Sets was banned because it was 'his turn,' like the first-round ban often is."

Bunny asks Wrecker how she decided on her list of people who might think Sets a threat.

Luvessy casts some suspicion on Riku for, as she characterized it, saying he wanted to lynch, but not saying who he thought should be the lynch candidate.

Bunny responds to Marinated with some color text that boils down to "my earlier comment was color text."

Wrecker replies to Bunny saying that her list of possible suspects was taken from people who had been rogues with him, former rogues who had been caught/pursued by him, and people who have had long exchanges with him in game threads.

Firebolt thought Sets might have been banned by rogues who found him a threat, and wonders why I was looking at the moderator. She also says she was going to ask Wrecker why that list of people, but was satisfied with her answer to Bunny.

Jolyma asks Wrecker why she left Bunny off her list, and says Sets might have been a 'no-information' ban, having said "the least."

Luvessy points out that she had technically said less than Sets at that point.

Leif points out that what little Sets had said seemed to indicate an interest in Duck, but that it would seem to be too obvious for Duck to ban him in response.

Riku finds Marinated's vote odd on the grounds that Bunny's comment as given for evidence didn't seem like the sort of thing a rogue would have reason to say. Says he'd have likely voted Marinated in past games, but is more cautious now. He responds to Luvessy that he had only meant that we should stop introducing ourselves and get down to business. And he says that having two rogues working together means that it will be harder to pinpoint a singular reason for a ban.

Joly replies to Luvessy that she had looked at login names to determine who had said the least.

I reply to Firebolt that my looking at the moderator was just roleplay.

Leif agrees that the moderator is always a rogue.

Wrecker replies to Joly that she'd rather not say why she left Bunny off the list and says that she feels that the people she named would have "ill intentions" toward Setsusa and want to ban him early.

Leif points out that Duck should have also been on Wrecker's list.

Wrecker replies that Duck does match her stated criteria, but she left him off on purpose. She says she has stated her suspicions, and asks Leif for his.

Leif replies that the connection between Duck and Sets is "obvious" and that Duck's continued absence is notable. He finds the inconsistencies in Wrecker's stated criteria and her list suspect. He points out that she hedged rather than actually state suspicions, and votes Wrecker.

I wondered why, if Leif thought Duck was a rogue who had banned Sets, he voted Wrecker because she might be protecting him.

Leif replied that he voted Wrecker for her inconsistency, and that was only superficially related to the possibility of Duck being a rogue.

Duck explains he's been busy moving, and he's not bothered by Wrecker's inconsistencies, because sometimes it's useful to not share everything.

Bunny has shot Alan-a-Dale in the head and tied his corpse to a tree as a warning to other would-be bards. She asks Wrecker if she has reasons other than the ban to suspect Riku and feels that the ban alone is not enough reason to lynch. She disagrees with Duck that it's helpful for Wrecker to withhold her information in this case, and that failing to account for the omissions from her list is of concern. She inquires after CrazyMG.

Wrecker finally states that she left the people off her list that she did because she thinks they're not annoyed enough by or afraid enough of Sets to ban him day 1. She says she hasn't hedged, and that she voted Riku to see how he would respond, feeling that rogue Riku tends to ignore votes on him while innocent Riku tends to argue with them.

Marinated says that Riku seems overly cautious and she doesn't like the way Leif is pushing a Duck/Sets connection, that they are her top two suspects. Replies to Riku that just because there are two rogues, that doesn't mean there's not one of the pair with a reason to ban Sets.

Joly thinks it would be weird for Luvessy to have contradicted her so quickly if she had hit on the reason for Sets' ban, but wonders if she did so in order to discredit her. She seems to have mistaken Wrecker's reasons for her list as "people who would try to be fair" instead of "people who might exercise an unfair animus."

CrazyMG says there had to be more than how little he said as a reason to ban Sets. She finds Wrecker's omissions notable and Marinated's vote weak. She's undecided on Riku.

Joly asks why CrazyMG thinks there had to be more reason than that, and points out that it could have been random. She votes CrazyMG on gut.

CrazyMG clarifies that she meant that very little had been said by anyone, so it was more likely to have been another reason, possibly even that it had been random.

Leif explains why he found Wrecker's list and criteria inconsistent, and also how she had hedged. He makes an ambiguous comment about how reasons are good in response to her explanation as to why she voted Riku.

Wrecker asks CrazyMG what she finds not-suspicious about Riku, and what about her list CrazyMG found noteworthy. She agrees with Bunny that the ban's not enough, and reiterates her recently presented reasons for voting Riku. She wants a lynch today, will not vote for CrazyMG, supports a Riku lynch.

Duck discusses when it's useful to withhold information and re-states that he's not concerned about Wrecker's having done so.

Bunny points out that although Marinated has stated that Riku and Leif are her top suspicions, Marinated is still voting for Bunny, and she wonders if the Bunny-vote was to seek traction for a bandwagon but will wait for Marinated to respond. She is satisfied with Wrecker's explanation for now, and has not yet found roleplay/content imbalance to be suspicious but she's growing less accepting of it as it continues. She finds it odd that Joly was not curious about Wrecker's ban hypothesis, but was curious about CrazyMG's.

---

If I have misunderstood something in the color text, please point it out, but I think this is a reasonably accurate summation of the day to this point.

I can see where Wrecker might have feared to offend with her assumptions, but I cannot see where anyone on her list would be inclined to ban Setsusa first round out of either fear or ill-will. I would be far more likely to believe that it was one or more of random/no-information/whose turn it is to get knocked out first, which unfortunately leaves us with the entire player list. I find what appears to be a ret-conned explanation for her vote on Riku to be of more concern.

I think Duck's nonchalance is a little out of character, but I don't find his comments internally inconsistent, and far be it from me to stand in the way of someone trying to play a more relaxed game -- has anyone heard from Quitex recently?

I find Marinated's vote on Bunny more than a little weak, but I know that Marinated does like to cast reaction-testing votes. It's more concerning to me that she did not unvote when she named her top suspicions as two other people.

I think Leif might be putting a little too much stock in a Duck/Sets connection, but I don't think he's necessarily "pushing" it, particularly since he didn't vote there. I'm satisfied after re-reading with his explanation that his Wrecker vote is not a function of his Duck/Sets theory, but a tangent of it.

I've not found Joly to be uncharacteristically inconsistent as yet, though I do note that her "login names" explanation doesn't quite cover her claim, either, given that Riku also had only one post that I see by that time, and several others had only two. It was not a terribly high-postcount first day all around. My apologies in advance if I have miscounted, but I do not think I did.

In all, I think I find my top suspicions at this moment to be not terribly strong ones, and those being Wrecker for the apparent ret-conned reason for voting Riku, and Marinated for leaving her vote on someone other than one of her top suspicions.

I am hesitant to vote while I'm having such trouble thinking, or y'know, seeing, so I'm going to try to come back and look things over one more time after another round of painkillers. In the meantime, my headache and I are going to go home early and argue some more.>

That's a depressingly handy summary.

That was a general encouragement to provide reasons when voting.

How is my vote for Riku ret-conned?

Well, howdy there again, Miss Joly Ma. I ain't none to sure I like being compared to a dwarf. There ain't no thing small about me. I can't say a fancy being called a missus, either, but I reckon it's hard to know what to call folk done days.

I was watchin' the campfire out back with Widow, and,well I just can't figure what ya mean bout me painting a target on my back. That there ain't no way to fight and I don't like coward. No, I'm just settin' the record straight, and claiming my fame where I got it.

There's two folk that gone caught my eye so fars. One is still Riku, who I thank right for splainin' himself, but I still need to watch out for. He's saying he just wants to get on down to business but then says he ain't yet ready for business. Now, I ain't too particular of he is or he ain't, but there's a difference tween truth-stretchin' and not beinga straight shooter and I is just here wondering who's doin' the latter.

And there's Firebolt, too, who I can't quite say why I'm curious there, but sure's I know I'm from Texas though I don't remember being born, I feel it in my gut.

I hope you'll reconsider that.

I really really think we need a lynch today. It's an uphill battle given we need six people to agree on the same person, but we *need* to get it together to agree, because we need the information that comes from a lynch.

"NAAAAAANTTSSSS
INGONYAAAAAAAMA BAGITHI BABAAAAAAAA"

Vote: CrazyMG

So far in our time together, not much of anything has stuck out to me. Because of that, I've been doing not much else other than sitting here in a corner in my chair blowing smoke rings, and for that I sincerely apologize. I've watched the proceedings of the Days, and listened to the discussions, and rather than noticing anything suspicious, I instead found myself over and over again wondering why other people have found things suspicious that I saw as harmless. I gave one example already, others would be the deal about login names and post amounts and Marinated not removing her vote. This has left me wondering what to do. I have found, over the years, that generally not much is gained on either side from telling someone their opinion is wrong. So rather than argue over the validity of someone else's suspicion, I have sat. I have listened. I have thought.

Finally, like the rising of the sun over the eastern hills, something appeared, and it caught my eye. At first I found myself, like our dear Jolyma, struggling to describe what it is about this that raised my suspicions. If I were to describe it in a word, that word would be "contrived". It is true, at a costume party, everyone is to some extent contrived. But this, in particular, was so in a different way. She made four points, as you can see here.

A unique thought, and a valid one. However, without any ideas of what that reason may be, it falls flat. It prompts discussion but offers none, while simultaneously fueling potentially fruitless speculation.

As she says herself, this is something that has been said before.

Again, something that has been said before. This time it is more worrying, as it appears to be passed off as an original thought.

And finally, a statement of indecision.

Taken individually, these pieces would hardly raise my eyebrow, let alone my suspicions. However, as a whole, she seems to talk but say nothing, and that is something I find highly indicative of someone who is trying to blend in and not draw attention. This was largely a gut reaction, but since I cannot see her face and none of you can see my gut (for which I'm sure we are all thankful), I tried to explain my suspicion in more relatable terms.

Thank you all for listening. I will now be returning to my chair for some wonderful Longbottom Leaf, but I'll be sure to rejoin the center of conversation before I retire for the evening.

The probabilities fall on the side of this lady.

The probabilities have also swayed from Wrecker some.

I don't really see the case against Crazy or Wrecker. I can get a glimmer of something about Firebolt but not enough for a vote. My gut is saying we may have a rogue Taelac here. I'm not entirely sure about Bunny but I'm leaning town there for the moment. Duck and Joly also leaning town. Luvessey I don't know yet.

Riku and Leif remain my top suspects with Leif being my preferred vote for today but I'm willing to switch to Riku if necessary.

Vote: Leif

Yep, I know I haven't given reasons but it's really just that his posts just don't seem right to me.

I'm going to sleep now. I should be awake before the deadline but I'll be busy getting the kids up and out so I won't be able to post much more than to change my vote if needed.