Harry Stephen Keeler [ENDGAME]

[Canucklehead]

One thing I wanted to mention about SVS' compelling theory about the newspaper article: much of the action in the recent RR game revolved around messages that were assumed to be from the host but we're actually written by players impersonating the host on both sides of the civ/baddie divide, and as a result much chaos ensued. This makes me consider the possibility that, if SVS' theory is correct, that perhaps at least one of the baddies was someone heavily involved in the RR game, most likely someone who lasted a fair while OR someone who kept involved by following along until quite late.
Zomba definitely fits the bill there.

Obviously this observation is not airtight. Impersonating host messages is hardly a new idea, and non-RR players could certainly have implemented it without being aware of its use in RR.....but I do think it's an interesting connection, and something to keep in mind if SVS is right about the article.

I thought it was meant yo impersonate the reporter role.I doubt llama would make a post using a role name, Gilfrick as the wills writer.

Ok, my bad for mishaps terrifying your theory, but I was just suggesting that impersonating other voices was a feature of RR, and there might be some overlap between people involved in that game, and people who might be likely to attempt something similar here.

[S~V~S]

Wrong post quoted.

Linki, I was kinda agreeing with you that it was a false message, canuck. If you meant the host pm being impersonated, llama and I talked about the glowy Buddha. So I think the actual PM really came from him.

[Golden]

Pgnss thnks Glrck trgtd smn t gv hs wll t. Th prsn h trgtd ws th Blnd Bst, Crl vn Trsslr.

*rl chck*

f Pgnss s rght, ppl shld lk fr sddn cs md gnst smn.

Interesting...

Epignosis thinks Gilrick targeted someone to give his will to. The person he targeted was the Blind Beast, Carl von Tresseler

*role check*

If Epignosis is right, people should look for a sudden case made against someone.

[Epignosis]

[Epignosis]

the Blind Beast

[S~V~S]

Another interesting possibility.

[S~V~S]

But who put it in the night post? The host doesn't just put stuff onto the post.

[Epignosis]

But who put it in the night post? The host doesn't just put stuff onto the post.

Rl chk.

Hst pst nstd f PM .

Crtv hst!

[juliets]

Does anyone know what Epi is trying to say? Something about a role check and other that I can't quite understand.

[Canucklehead]

"Role Check. Host post instead of PM. Creative host!"

[Epignosis]

"Role Check. Host post instead of PM. Creative host!"

[juliets]

"Role Check. Host post instead of PM. Creative host!"

But what does that mean is what I'm really asking. What does a role check have to do with the article in the paper. And what does "host post instead of PM" mean?

[Epignosis]

"Role Check. Host post instead of PM. Creative host!"

But what does that mean is what I'm really asking. What does a role check have to do with the article in the paper. And what does "host post instead of PM" mean?

lnk

[rabbit8]

So we are actually going to wait for the info dump now?

[Golden]

the Blind Beast

Lol, oops

[S~V~S]

So we are actually going to wait for the info dump now?

Seriously.

[Long Con]

One thing I wanted to mention about SVS' compelling theory about the newspaper article: much of the action in the recent RR game revolved around messages that were assumed to be from the host but we're actually written by players impersonating the host on both sides of the civ/baddie divide, and as a result much chaos ensued. This makes me consider the possibility that, if SVS' theory is correct, that perhaps at least one of the baddies was someone heavily involved in the RR game, most likely someone who lasted a fair while OR someone who kept involved by following along until quite late.
Zomba definitely fits the bill there.

Obviously this observation is not airtight. Impersonating host messages is hardly a new idea, and non-RR players could certainly have implemented it without being aware of its use in RR.....but I do think it's an interesting connection, and something to keep in mind if SVS is right about the article.

I thought it was meant yo impersonate the reporter role.I doubt llama would make a post using a role name, Gilfrick as the wills writer.

Ok, my bad for mishaps terrifying your theory, but I was just suggesting that impersonating other voices was a feature of RR, and there might be some overlap between people involved in that game, and people who might be likely to attempt something similar here.

You are like a one-woman Insanifier sometimes.
I agree that it's unlikely that Llama would publish that newspaper article with the knowledge that the kill didn't go through. And it's just weird anyway, what's it supposed to be if it's from Llama? Some sort of bone to throw to Zombarella for BF permanently throwing her name into the mix on Day One? Hint that she's Gilrick and let us all run with it?

[Long Con]

So we are actually going to wait for the info dump now?

We don't have to. We could just start voting Epignosis.

[Canucklehead]

So we are actually going to wait for the info dump now?

Seriously.

I'm confused. What are we laughing/mad about now? I'm having a very slow brain day an need help


Linki: Lulz. My autocorrect is very cheeky.

[S~V~S]

One thing I wanted to mention about SVS' compelling theory about the newspaper article: much of the action in the recent RR game revolved around messages that were assumed to be from the host but we're actually written by players impersonating the host on both sides of the civ/baddie divide, and as a result much chaos ensued. This makes me consider the possibility that, if SVS' theory is correct, that perhaps at least one of the baddies was someone heavily involved in the RR game, most likely someone who lasted a fair while OR someone who kept involved by following along until quite late.
Zomba definitely fits the bill there.

Obviously this observation is not airtight. Impersonating host messages is hardly a new idea, and non-RR players could certainly have implemented it without being aware of its use in RR.....but I do think it's an interesting connection, and something to keep in mind if SVS is right about the article.

I thought it was meant yo impersonate the reporter role.I doubt llama would make a post using a role name, Gilfrick as the wills writer.

Ok, my bad for mishaps terrifying your theory, but I was just suggesting that impersonating other voices was a feature of RR, and there might be some overlap between people involved in that game, and people who might be likely to attempt something similar here.

You are like a one-woman Insanifier sometimes.
I agree that it's unlikely that Llama would publish that newspaper article with the knowledge that the kill didn't go through. And it's just weird anyway, what's it supposed to be if it's from Llama? Some sort of bone to throw to Zombarella for BF permanently throwing her name into the mix on Day One? Hint that she's Gilrick and let us all run with it?

I disagree. Although not about the autocorrects.s.

[Golden]

In all seriousness, though, SVS, is your theory terrified now that Canuck is here?

[Long Con]

One thing I wanted to mention about SVS' compelling theory about the newspaper article: much of the action in the recent RR game revolved around messages that were assumed to be from the host but we're actually written by players impersonating the host on both sides of the civ/baddie divide, and as a result much chaos ensued. This makes me consider the possibility that, if SVS' theory is correct, that perhaps at least one of the baddies was someone heavily involved in the RR game, most likely someone who lasted a fair while OR someone who kept involved by following along until quite late.
Zomba definitely fits the bill there.

Obviously this observation is not airtight. Impersonating host messages is hardly a new idea, and non-RR players could certainly have implemented it without being aware of its use in RR.....but I do think it's an interesting connection, and something to keep in mind if SVS is right about the article.

I thought it was meant yo impersonate the reporter role.I doubt llama would make a post using a role name, Gilfrick as the wills writer.

Ok, my bad for mishaps terrifying your theory, but I was just suggesting that impersonating other voices was a feature of RR, and there might be some overlap between people involved in that game, and people who might be likely to attempt something similar here.

You are like a one-woman Insanifier sometimes.
I agree that it's unlikely that Llama would publish that newspaper article with the knowledge that the kill didn't go through. And it's just weird anyway, what's it supposed to be if it's from Llama? Some sort of bone to throw to Zombarella for BF permanently throwing her name into the mix on Day One? Hint that she's Gilrick and let us all run with it?

I disagree. Although not about the autocorrects.s.

You... disagree? But I was saying it's unlikely that Llama wrote the article, and it's likely that the baddies wrote it as a ploy that hinged on your death. Maybe I wrote that post in a confusing way, or else I really don't understand.

[Golden]

OK, Epi, questions. Sorry for asking you questions while you can't use vowels. Mind you, you are the one bringing up a new theory, so I'm not that sorry.

Yesterday, you seemed (to me) to agree with the zombs theory that SVS and I were talking about. Today, you have espoused what appears to be a different theory.

So what I want to know is this:

Was I correct in thinking that you can see the merit in yesterday's zombs theory?

Have you now moved away from thinking that is correct? Or can you just see two different possibilities? Or do you think the two theories are somehow linked and part of one unified theory (a la Einstein)?

Have you, as of now, identified any candidate for the 'sudden case' you are looking for?

[Golden]

My own personal thoughts, though, on Epi's theory.

It would have to be one hell of a coincidence if:

1) The blond beast targetted SVS, thus was about to be the beneficiary of the will we all already know about if she died; AND
2) Gilrick had a role check masquerading as 'you are the beneficiary of my will', and he happened to target the blond beast.

[S~V~S]

LC I guess I have to reread it when not on phone. I probably did misunderstand.

[rabbit8]

Chances the host allows baddies to insert into his host posts?

I have never played a Lama game before.

[Long Con]

My own personal thoughts, though, on Epi's theory.

It would have to be one hell of a coincidence if:

1) The blond beast targetted SVS, thus was about to be the beneficiary of the will we all already know about if she died; AND
2) Gilrick had a role check masquerading as 'you are the beneficiary of my will', and he happened to target the blond beast.

Indeed... Epig's "theory" would imply that he thinks S~V~S is lying... or that this grand coincidence happened.

[Golden]

Chances the host allows baddies to insert into his host posts?

I have never played a Lama game before.

A Lama game? If he is a buddhist monk, it would explain why SVS's buddha was so protective

[Bass_the_Clever]

Ok so I'm starting to find it odd that Zombie hasn't posted at all I don't know why anyone would silence her I agree that TH most liking got silenced and Zombie could be faking it. I had BTSC with Zombie in Roger Rabbit and we were both baddies and she can come up with some crazy ideas when her name is being thrown around like fake being silenced.

[Epignosis]

OK, Epi, questions. Sorry for asking you questions while you can't use vowels. Mind you, you are the one bringing up a new theory, so I'm not that sorry.

Yesterday, you seemed (to me) to agree with the zombs theory that SVS and I were talking about. Today, you have espoused what appears to be a different theory.

So what I want to know is this:

Was I correct in thinking that you can see the merit in yesterday's zombs theory?

Have you now moved away from thinking that is correct? Or can you just see two different possibilities? Or do you think the two theories are somehow linked and part of one unified theory (a la Einstein)?

Have you, as of now, identified any candidate for the 'sudden case' you are looking for?

Th ndrlnd. Jst nw thght pgnss hd.

& N. Glrck slncd?

My own personal thoughts, though, on Epi's theory.

It would have to be one hell of a coincidence if:

1) The blond beast targetted SVS, thus was about to be the beneficiary of the will we all already know about if she died; AND
2) Gilrick had a role check masquerading as 'you are the beneficiary of my will', and he happened to target the blond beast.

Indeed... Epig's "theory" would imply that he thinks S~V~S is lying... or that this grand coincidence happened.

SVS ddn't thnk ppgnss thght sh ws tllng ls.

[Golden]

OK, Epi, questions. Sorry for asking you questions while you can't use vowels. Mind you, you are the one bringing up a new theory, so I'm not that sorry.

Yesterday, you seemed (to me) to agree with the zombs theory that SVS and I were talking about. Today, you have espoused what appears to be a different theory.

So what I want to know is this:

Was I correct in thinking that you can see the merit in yesterday's zombs theory?

Have you now moved away from thinking that is correct? Or can you just see two different possibilities? Or do you think the two theories are somehow linked and part of one unified theory (a la Einstein)?

Have you, as of now, identified any candidate for the 'sudden case' you are looking for?

Th ndrlnd. Jst nw thght pgnss hd.

& N. Glrck slncd?

The underlined. Just a new thought Epignosis had.

And no. Gilrick silenced?

My own personal thoughts, though, on Epi's theory.

It would have to be one hell of a coincidence if:

1) The blond beast targetted SVS, thus was about to be the beneficiary of the will we all already know about if she died; AND
2) Gilrick had a role check masquerading as 'you are the beneficiary of my will', and he happened to target the blond beast.

Indeed... Epig's "theory" would imply that he thinks S~V~S is lying... or that this grand coincidence happened.

SVS ddn't thnk ppgnss thght sh ws tllng ls.

SVS didn't think Epignosis thought she was telling lies.

Ironically, epi, the closest thing I've seen to fitting your theory would be LC coming hard after you today. Lucky I'm more convinced by SVS's theory than yours

[S~V~S]

OK, Epi, questions. Sorry for asking you questions while you can't use vowels. Mind you, you are the one bringing up a new theory, so I'm not that sorry.

Yesterday, you seemed (to me) to agree with the zombs theory that SVS and I were talking about. Today, you have espoused what appears to be a different theory.

So what I want to know is this:

Was I correct in thinking that you can see the merit in yesterday's zombs theory?

Have you now moved away from thinking that is correct? Or can you just see two different possibilities? Or do you think the two theories are somehow linked and part of one unified theory (a la Einstein)?

Have you, as of now, identified any candidate for the 'sudden case' you are looking for?

Th ndrlnd. Jst nw thght pgnss hd.

& N. Glrck slncd?

My own personal thoughts, though, on Epi's theory.

It would have to be one hell of a coincidence if:

1) The blond beast targetted SVS, thus was about to be the beneficiary of the will we all already know about if she died; AND
2) Gilrick had a role check masquerading as 'you are the beneficiary of my will', and he happened to target the blond beast.

Indeed... Epig's "theory" would imply that he thinks S~V~S is lying... or that this grand coincidence happened.

SVS ddn't thnk ppgnss thght sh ws tllng ls.

No, she doesn't think that at all. My theory is a theory, based on what I think happened. It could be wrong. the more options out on the table, the more we can analyze the data we have. I happen to prefer my theory but opposing thoughts are good.

Just got home got some stuff to do, bbl.

[rabbit8]

Epi's case on Epi is pretty epic.......

[Dom]

I think we should vote Zomba fwiw.

[S~V~S]

I hate voting for someone who is not around to represent. But I really don't think she was silenced. I think she is avoiding the thread. I hope she does not have RL, becasue i know she is REALLY into this whole mafia thing. So either she CAN'T get here, or she is avoiding coming here.

I have never faux silenced myself, and don't criticize those who do so; to each his own. But it isn't my favorite tactic.

[DisgruntledPorcupine]

For the record I'm not silenced, to the surprise of not very many.

As for Zomb, yeah I'm conflicted about that.

[S~V~S]

For the record I'm not silenced, to the surprise of not very many.

As for Zomb, yeah I'm conflicted about that.

Have you ever been silenced?

[juliets]

Maybe if someone less prolific than TH appeared silenced it might make it more believable that zomba is the one who is really silenced. However, I think I would have seen that as the baddies silencing one of their own given the situation. I am not going to vote yet though, in case something rl happened today I want to at least give her part of tomorrow to respond to whats been said.

[S~V~S]

Well, Zombarella is in the house. Will she stop in and say hello?

[Zombarella]

Holy smokes! I've never in my life seen so many people who wanted to hear from me. I missed the vote because I was in jail. I didn't say so at the time b/c of infodumping or whatever but my hints were falling on deaf ears. The role says that if you are in jail your vote doesn't count, but the PM I got actually said that I wasn't allowed to vote.

I am not "faking" I really have not been here. I went out to dinner and a movie last night and today I've been busy with school. Sheesh.

Okay - All of you who are listening to SVS really need to take a look at what she is saying. She told us what my will said, I was relieved that my ROLE, which has nothing to do with money - it would have been ruined because of WHAT MY ROLE DOES - not money - besides, I don't even get how the Millionaire role would be ruined by what BF said. That's what doesn't make sense. I know that I'm not bad and what I said doesn't make sense for one of the baddie roles, but it does for one or more of the civvie roles. I thought that the suspicion that Rabbit and BWT (who isnt' reading the thread) had would die off. But now SVS comes up with this idea that I "misinterpreted" what she said and that makes me bad and that only one will can exist in the game (even though the word "wills" is specifically used in at least one of the role descriptions) and that the baddies somehow wrote the newspaper post (even though there are civ roles that actually post to the newspaper) and that the baddies would choose some convoluted message about Gilchrist (who I am NOT) to defend me because I am their baddie teammate and that she must have been the target of the NK because now her statue isn't glowing anymore (first time she mentions this) so how convenient that all these people who only read the thread sporadically just happen to read that and assume that she is civ because she was supposedly the NK target and that the baddies would want to be defending me anyway after all the heat I'm in.

SVS's theories are so full of holes and assumptions! She just wants me dead because she wants whatever stuff she thinks I have.

Here's what I think.

1) I misunderstood my role from the very beginning.
2) I took the stock certificate.
3) BF made a claim, I flipped out, I PM'ed Llama. I came back to the game after some clarification.
4) People think that I flipped out because I wouldn't have said what I said unless I'm the millionaire. But that doesn't make sense for two reasons. Why would the Millionaire say that and two why would a baddie team let me say that. Bass even said, I had all kinds of bad ideas that the baddies wouldn't let me do last time I was bad. Now I don't have that filter.
5) SVS gets the will says it says something different. I realize that BF might not have been telling the truth and now I'm less upset. This pings SVS? Why?
6) BECAUSE SHE WANTS ME TO DIE!
7) Now SVS has cooked up this wild speculation about the info in the newspaper making me look bad. That is crazy. There are just as many civ explanations.

DO NOT HOP ON SVS's BANDWAGON. She is using the fact that so many people aren't reading the thread to her advantage. I think that SVS and probably Rabbit and BWT are celestials that are after whatever they can get.

We've already lynched two civs. Please don't make it three.

[Zombarella]

Well, Zombarella is in the house. Will she stop in and say hello?

Hello you big fake case building zen wolf celestial!

[Zombarella]

Maybe if someone less prolific than TH appeared silenced it might make it more believable that zomba is the one who is really silenced. However, I think I would have seen that as the baddies silencing one of their own given the situation. I am not going to vote yet though, in case something rl happened today I want to at least give her part of tomorrow to respond to whats been said.

ZOMBA IS NOT SILENCED!!! I WILL NEVER BE SILENCED.

[Dom]

Hop on SVS's bandwagon.

[S~V~S]

I did not build a case. And if i was a Celestial, they're not baddies, Sweetie.

Linki,

Linki again, it isn't my bandwagon

[fingersplints]

Who isn't reading the thread?

[S~V~S]

that was the image.

[Zombarella]

I did not build a case. And if i was a Celestial, they're not baddies, Sweetie.

Linki,

Linki again, it isn't my bandwagon

Sugar pie, I never said Celestials were bad. I just said that I think you are one and that is why you went after BF's will and now your spinning every event to get me lynched so you can get what I have. Well, news for you. Lynch me and you'll get nothing but a fat lot of nothing. My stock was worthless and my role doesn't have money. If you are so "good" as you claim, lets lynch someone bad, not someone who's death would only benefit you.

[S~V~S]

I could care what you have.

[Bass_the_Clever]

Zombie why do you think SVS wants what you have? I mean if you do get lynched I would think the mafia would just night kill her soo it's really putting a target on her

[Zombarella]

Who isn't reading the thread?

Apparently you because I named at least one name in my last post.