Season 6 - Saw - Day 2

Thian, you missed the number 7 in the living players list.

What I think really needs to happen now is that the seer needs to clear a target if they can.

I find it interesting that Virtuanno is so suspicious of me being 'defended' by Brant, when he was, too. The following posts are true, and not taken out of context, and sometimes quoted when I feel it is is pertinent. There is one moment of speculation, which it is up for you all to decide how you feel about it.

On page 4, Brant declares a love for Virtuanno's logic.

From page 6:

Brant wrote:

Virtuanno: Of the players, he seems like the most logical, coherent new Innocent Victim.

On page 7, Brant states that of the split, he would be inclined to vote for me, again praising Virtuanno's train of thought.

On page 11, Brant again states that we should choose a side between Virtuanno and myself, followed shortly by another post stating the same. After that, Virtuanno jumps on the Dragonldy vote (with Brant also voting Dragonldy), nearly lynching her. Later on this page, Virtuanno states that his initial thought was Brant was protecting me, but after a re-read, he did not. Now suddenly he does again.

On page 12, Brant does indeed state that he is reluctant to vote for me as a new player, and I certainly appreciate that sentiment. Then he goes on to point out that Dragonldy is dangerously close to being lynched, and that the reason I am no longer in quite so much danger may be due to what he said, although he does mention that I still have the potential to be a target. Brant also recounts a passed game on this page, which may turn out to be a nice reference to what the accomplices were planning (If you want to hide something, put it where nobody will suspect to look). He also states an interest in Tiffani as a target. He also blatantly defends Jackie and Virtuanno:

Brant wrote:

I also don't think, based on how they voted, that Jackie or Virtuanno have evil roles.

I finish this page with a statement about how I care to share my biscuits.

On page 13, Virtuanno quotes Brant, saying "Spoken like a true wolf!" Brant then posts a picture of a clown and offers a balloon, like a parent does to distract unruly children. Deetser also points out that Virtuanno fits Brant's voting criteria better than I do. Jackie ends the page by pairing both Virtuanno and I with Brant as "improbable duos".

On page 15, after Gary voted for Brant, Virtuanno again votes with Brant against Tiffani this time. A couple posts later, Brant again states that he does not want to vote for a new player, naming both myself and Virtuanno, but naming me as the one he would vote for if forced to choose sides. He also lists some people he is "suspicious" of. Dogdude points out a voting pattern. Virtuanno defends his voting style to Dogdude.

On page 16, Virtuanno votes for Brant, making him the 4th to do so, seemingly plenty of time to retract the vote should things get too dicey*. Brant defends his Tiffani vote.

Over the next few posts, Virtuanno never posts again. Brant accumulates his last 4 votes begging for life.

*I am under the impression that Virtuanno was not able to get back online in time to retract his Brant vote, saving him, or did not choose to do so, having no other viable target, not being able to do so without looking suspicious. I realize this is a Virtuanno-heavy post, for a while I felt that my suspicion of him was misplaced, but after his blatant attempt to pin me as somebody Brant wanted to save, I could not sit idle any longer. If Brant wanted to protect anyone, it was Virtuanno.


>>Edited to highlight the speculation in yellow italics<<

I should note that in regards to my speculation, about an hour and a half after Virtuanno voted for Brant, Brant was lynched.

I'm going to clear this up for you.

1. Last game, Brant was town cancer.
2. I -know- that Brant is a smart guy, but I saw absolutely no improvement on his game play this time around.
3. From his very first post, I read Brant as being suspicious.
4. I had nearly voted Brant twice before I actually got the time to post my full suspicion. About three times I had written 'I vote to lynch Brant', but then I erased it and wrote something like:

'That looked suspicious to me, but I had to re-read it.'
'Spoken like a true wolf!'
'Brant is looking more and more suspicious to me.'

5. I voted Brant knowing and hoping that he was on his way out.

I had no intention of retracting my vote either, and I was online when he was sacrificed.

That is all fine and well, I just don't see how you can hang on to your vote against me using the logic that he was trying to protect me, when indeed it was you he was trying to protect. I am trying to point out that voting for me because Brant was 'protecting me' is just asinine.

Maybe Brant was trying to protect both of us?

I retract my vote for derBmoose for the time being.

Those of us that have been playing a lot of seasons of this game.. we tend to try to give the new players a chance.. by not voting for them the first round.. it's almost like an unspoken rule that we do. Honestly I do believe that's what Brant was doing.. hence his defending of both of you.. We had 4 new players this game.. and just as he wasn't gonna vote for any of them the first round.. neither was I and I'm sure it's the same for the other vets of this game.

That's why it's kind of dicey to say that Brant was defending any of the newer players.. since he probably wouldn't have after the first round. Mind you he was an accomplice.. but I just don't think he would actually defend his fellow accomplices.. he's much smarter than that.

Which is why I still haven't voted for Virtuanno, it is still speculation, albeit strong, moderately-supported speculation. I am hesitant to throw out a rushed vote now because of last round. I want to think it through and make calculated votes, not random frequent ones, as to me that seems like something an accomplice would do to keep the innocents off-balance.

There are a couple other people that are popping up on my radar that strike me more than him, and I am watching them. Later tomorrow and the next day, I plan on going through the other posts like I did with Brant and Virtuanno. Hopefully I can pick out some patterns that are useful and not all fancy fluff.

Isn't that breaking the rules? You aren't allowed to do that.. not to mention.. editing stuff like that is easy to do as well..

Who's breaking the rules?

It says you can't tell anyone your role.. this is you "proving" your role.. that's not fair.. or all of us innocent victims could do that.. and then we'd have those that know how to edit things like that doing the same and then everyone would be innocent.. or we'd just make the game not fun at all.. I do believe it's breaking the rules.. if not close to breaking the rules.. that just defeats the purpose of the game .. wish the host was on.. I don't think I'll post till I speak with him.

The rules say that you can't tell anyone your role outside of the game thread. Otherwise, no one would be able to say: "I'm a villager" in any of their posts.

I don't want to get into an argument over semantics, so let's talk about accomplices instead.

I am confused, did I do something wrong?

derBmoose wrote:

I am confused, did I do something wrong?

I don't know what he's talking about either.

i saw your role too buddy , uncool

I'm so confused, what are you guys talking about?

lol the picture you posted of your role, i was sitting right next to kenya when you posted it...then you deleted it and changed it to a bannana, totaly ruins the game for us..QQ, oh and kenya is a she

Virtuanno wrote:

Last edited by Virtuanno on Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:23 am; edited 1 time in total

seee

Voting for Dragontear

I have no idea what you're talking about, so you must be a wolf.

lol go for it, vote for who ever you want

at least i know your not a wolf lol