A Gentleman's Game of Guile, Subterfuge, and Intrigue (Fin)

[vezokpiraka]

Iou don' lik' da way I speak? (It's not a PR. I'm just trying to be amusing)

I think in my little head that this mate her' ,feysal, is a chap as good as me.

I'll answer for the stranger, ove' ther' later.

[Apokalyptika]

Sir imaginality's absence deeply saddens my heart. When you return, my good man, would you care to respond to the point I brought up?

Sir Caboose, why did my suggestion as regards Sir Vezok cause such mirth? It seemed an eminently serious and reasonable position to me. As a matter of fact, Sir Longing's continued pressure on Sir vezok, especially when combined with a reasonable (if somewhat linguistically jarring) entrance into proceedings, fills me with caution. (As an aside, Sir Caboose, I would request you not to refer to me as Lady. After all, we are almost all noble gentlemen here, and it would be most crass for one gentleman to speculate upon the contents of another gentleman's trousers.)

[TheLonging]

I'm going to quickly abandon the gentleman talk for a short while because I have to hurry.

I'm going to ask all of you; why do you not have a vote on vezok? If you don't support the policy lynch, why? And don't give me the "He might be a PR" crap. Vezok is posting fluff in every single post he's making now. I'm going to assume that if you have a crappy reasoning for not lynching vezok, that vezok is scum with you. I'm serious. This has worked for me before in other games with policy lynches on irc and offsite.

When I come back I'll go answer you guys and not just skim page 4.

[vezokpiraka]

W'o d'ou think you are Longing?

Wha' hav' Aye don' wron'?
I thin' dat yu ar' a bad guy. The way you come here and thr'at'n me. Seems lik' yu' wan' me dead for being a good chap.

[kpaca]

My apologies for my late arrival my dear fellow gents, but I was forced away to my dear aunt's for the Easter holiday. Rest assured she sends her regards to you and yours and she is doing well.

I will certainly be reviewing the minutes from our current meeting and expressing my opinions on what I've missed.

[kpaca]

Vezokpiraka my dear brother, you role-playing is most daft I must say.

You would be doing us all a great service if you spoke more like your commoner cousins. And surely you want to be doing us a service don't you?

[Twistedspoon]

any other observations from your recap Baron Paca?

[StrangerCoug]

I'm going to ask all of you; why do you not have a vote on vezok?

It is of my complete understanding that vezokpiraka has declined to make useful contributions to out discussion; however, I wish to pursue somebody that I see as a bigger threat to the lodge. I am not afraid to change my mind, however, and if my lead on Twistedspoon expires, then I shall work to evict vezokpiraka.

If you don't support the policy lynch, why?

I believe that policy lynches are designed to deprive town of information; however, see the above. The point at which the term "policy lynch" stops to apply has passed, and the correct term is now "lynching somebody scummy".

And don't give me the "He might be a PR" crap.

I think anybody that dare claim to fear that risk is in fact fishing for our powers. While I believe your statement is in good faith and believe that the "he's possibly a power" complaint will result in due consequences, the order seems to imply that we lack common sense.

[Wraith]

GMan

has requested replacement.

[DemonHybrid]

Well, hello, my good gentlemen. I believe I have come across this meeting so dreary, I must stay and assist you in matters most dire. It seems my associate and good friend GMan has decided to take the most unexpected leave of absence, so, I did decide to make haste in order to continue his involvement in such a situation. As business associates and good friends, you may consider us one in the same.

Please excuse me, my fine fellows, as I must review the events of the day in order to become informed of this monstrosity that has occurred post haste. Any assistance in obtaining the knowledge of post events as I turn back the metaphorical clocks would be much appreciated.

[DemonHybrid]

Ah, what what, my jolly good chaps, it appears the eye was quicker than the tongue! I do believe that I understand the situation and declare myself most ready to act.

A declaration of a Vote on the Gentleman known as Apokalyptika

, as I do not find his eagerness to protest the ejection of a man such as vezokpiraka as a genuine exposition. As well, Mr. Apokalyptika seems to favor the side of defending those most pressured for a reason most absent and hollow. This is something I will and cannot stand for, good sir, and I do wish you the rope.

[Wraith]

As you chaps can all see,

DemonHybrid

replaces GMan.

[imaginality]

First, two unsettled matters:

Twistedspoon has singularly failed to address my question in post 59.

Spoiler: post 59

Thus I believed the reasoning to be random

Even despite this?

This vote is not one that I have cast in a random manner.

As for Apokalyptika's question: I thank you for clarifying your point further, in post 68. I now understand your reason for questioning my earlier post and regard the principle of your suspicion as reasonable, but its practical application in this instance to be excessive. To whit:

Spoiler: post 68

The reading material you gentleman have seen fit to share with us certainly elucidates the potential agonies we may all suffer if we allow vezokpiraka to remain part of our gathering.

Unvote; vote: vezokpiraka

Is Twistedspoon villainous in your eyes, Hoppster, for his preference for discussing celestial matters and other such frippery rather than actively scumhunting?

If so, I would caution that the hour is still early and others amongst us (e.g. StrangerCoug) have been no more committed to genuinely scumhunting as yet.

Or is there another reason for suspicion to be cast on Twistedspoon in particular?

The sentence I have here emphasized is the main focus of my suspicion. Not only do you make rash assumptions regarding the intentions of Sir Hoppster (there is a saying regarding the forming of assumptions, but it is far too crass to mention here) but you also specifically invoke the name of another, namely StrangerCoug. This strikes me as being a tad too emphatic for refuting the basis of a case that, at that time, had not been fully explained by Sir Hoppster.

I agree that putting words into another's mouth is generally a faux pas on occasions such as this. However the 'If' with which I began said paragraph should make it clear I was not assuming, but rather enquiring. I did not see myself as refuting Sir Hoppster's case, but rather seeking to confirm its nature, and check that it was sufficiently weighty to further discuss. And the 'e.g.' in the bolded sentence should make it clear that StrangerCoug's name was not 'specifically invoked' but 'invoked by way of example'.

Now, on to other concerns:

1. kr0b's mere echoing of Apokalyptika's point, in post 69, and his fluff post 71, have alarmed me to a stern degree. He is high on my list of rogues and rapscallions at this point.

2. Feysal's entrance pleases me, as does DemonHybrid. My belly rumbles in warning at inHimshallibe's first posts, but I am unsure why.

3. While vezokpiraka's manner of talking is crude, TheLonging is stretching a point when he says:

Vezok is posting fluff in every single post he's making now.

His iso#2 and iso#6 contain useful material. While still of a low proportion, I am inclined to

Unvote

and

Vote: kr0b

4.

If it really is the year 2011, how did the Duke of Spoon not recognize Sir vezokpiraka's use of the vernacular at the beginning of the game?

[/quote]

The Duke of Spoon had already been at the brandy, I suspect.

[kr0b]

First, two unsettled matters:

Twistedspoon has singularly failed to address my question in post 59.

Spoiler: post 59

Thus I believed the reasoning to be random

Even despite this?

This vote is not one that I have cast in a random manner.

As for Apokalyptika's question: I thank you for clarifying your point further, in post 68. I now understand your reason for questioning my earlier post and regard the principle of your suspicion as reasonable, but its practical application in this instance to be excessive. To whit:

Spoiler: post 68

The reading material you gentleman have seen fit to share with us certainly elucidates the potential agonies we may all suffer if we allow vezokpiraka to remain part of our gathering.

Unvote; vote: vezokpiraka

Is Twistedspoon villainous in your eyes, Hoppster, for his preference for discussing celestial matters and other such frippery rather than actively scumhunting?

If so, I would caution that the hour is still early and others amongst us (e.g. StrangerCoug) have been no more committed to genuinely scumhunting as yet.

Or is there another reason for suspicion to be cast on Twistedspoon in particular?

The sentence I have here emphasized is the main focus of my suspicion. Not only do you make rash assumptions regarding the intentions of Sir Hoppster (there is a saying regarding the forming of assumptions, but it is far too crass to mention here) but you also specifically invoke the name of another, namely StrangerCoug. This strikes me as being a tad too emphatic for refuting the basis of a case that, at that time, had not been fully explained by Sir Hoppster.

I agree that putting words into another's mouth is generally a faux pas on occasions such as this. However the 'If' with which I began said paragraph should make it clear I was not assuming, but rather enquiring. I did not see myself as refuting Sir Hoppster's case, but rather seeking to confirm its nature, and check that it was sufficiently weighty to further discuss. And the 'e.g.' in the bolded sentence should make it clear that StrangerCoug's name was not 'specifically invoked' but 'invoked by way of example'.

Now, on to other concerns:

1. kr0b's mere echoing of Apokalyptika's point, in post 69, and his fluff post 71, have alarmed me to a stern degree. He is high on my list of rogues and rapscallions at this point.

2. Feysal's entrance pleases me, as does DemonHybrid. My belly rumbles in warning at inHimshallibe's first posts, but I am unsure why.

3. While vezokpiraka's manner of talking is crude, TheLonging is stretching a point when he says:

Vezok is posting fluff in every single post he's making now.

His iso#2 and iso#6 contain useful material. While still of a low proportion, I am inclined to

Unvote

and

Vote: kr0b

4.

If it really is the year 2011, how did the Duke of Spoon not recognize Sir vezokpiraka's use of the vernacular at the beginning of the game?

The Duke of Spoon had already been at the brandy, I suspect.[/quote]

This is most interesting. I am the subject of a vote, it appears, but for what reason that is not to be seen on others? That I cannot tell. I echoed a point? Perhaps I simply agreed. And if one is t regard Post #71 as a fluff post, then one must also consider both of kpaca's posts' "fluff posts". Perhaps a special exception is made for myself, or perhaps Imaginality is simply brushing over and not considering the legitimacy of kpaca's posts because the young gentleman has only just arrived to the proceedings. Either way, I find it most peculiar to see Imaginality picking and choosing which posts he perceives as "fluff". Maybe the good sir needs to lay off of his whiskey.

And maybe kpaca needs to contribute more to this function, t'would be outlandishly noble, of course, if our friend kpaca's is willing to help find these rapscallions, rather than tag along and echo sentiments made by other esteemed guests, (namely the esteemed guests who seem to have more than a word or two to say).

[imaginality]

This is most interesting. I am the subject of a vote, it appears, but for what reason that is not to be seen on others? That I cannot tell. I echoed a point?

Perhaps

I simply agreed. And if one is t regard Post #71 as a fluff post, then one must also consider both of kpaca's posts' "fluff posts". Perhaps a special exception is made for myself, or perhaps Imaginality is simply brushing over and not considering the legitimacy of kpaca's posts because the young gentleman has only just arrived to the proceedings. Either way, I find it most peculiar to see Imaginality picking and choosing which posts he perceives as "fluff". Maybe the good sir needs to lay off of his whiskey.

Non-commital language of this type is a scumtell. An honorable gentleman would be able to state with certainty that he simply agreed. A scoundrel who echoed the other fellow's point to save him from the need to think independently and shield him from standing out from the crowd would also like to say with certainty that he simply agreed, but the remaining shreds of his conscience halt his tongue and all he can utter is a stammering, "Per-per-haps, I agreed, maybe; that could be true, right?"

kpaca's next posts will certainly be of interest to me, but in terms of my attitude towards fluff posts, there is no difference between the leniency I have shown towards his opening posts, and my same allowance for your contentless posts iso#0 to iso#2. Your cry of hypocrisy is unfounded.

And you have still yet to make any contribution of note. Suggesting kpaca contributes more, less than a day after he has arrived at our gathering, is hardly the type of incisive scum-hunting that will help us unmask and vanquish the rogues amongst us.

[Wraith]

There will be yet another counting of the ballots come nightfall, assuming I am not dreadfully incapacitated as a result of daytime recreation.

[inHimshallibe]

Also I bid you well him, I believe our paths have crossed at some point in the distant past?

Why do you find Spoon to be such a trustworthy fellow?

I believe I've regaled you once of his good fashion, but Duke Spoon has shown an eager approach, responding to near any and everything. I'm quite fond of this opening, and am only remorse I was not around from the drop of the hat in this diversion to conduct myself in a manner similar to that of Duke Spoon. Tragic, yes, but I shall make myself a most visible presence in due circumstance.

[inHimshallibe]

Your deliberation in pursuing even the earliest of leads in sniffing out villainy bolster my confidence.

Perchance, is this an observation made in jest? Alas, I fear our good friend inHim has sustained a knock to the head from falling out of his carriage in his rush to minimise the social stigma afforded to one so fashionably late.

Nay, good sir, it is quite obvious the Duke has been joshing over semantics with you first, erstwhile his musings elsewhere have keyed me into this most fortunate of discoveries, which is a post branching off from the verbal jousting with yourself, Sir Hoppster, to ask others which Gentlemen are not what they seem. His reasoning vis-a-vis your retaliatory suspicion is a fair point as well, as I see no pertinent logick in casting a wary monocle on the fair Duke Spoon.

[inHimshallibe]

As an aside, I absolutely adore this particular form of merriment.

[Twistedspoon]

Thus I believed the reasoning to be random

Even despite this?

This vote is not one that I have cast in a random manner.

[/spoiler]

how can this be as you have accredited both the knave hoppster and myself to the post 55?

But to answer you question, yes even despite hoppster's statement to the contrary did I believe his vote to of a random nature. Methinks the supposed declaration of it being a serious ballot was to apply pressure to myself. After all, there was no non-random reason for Hoppster to do so anyways.

The Baron Imagainality's exploitations of linguistics would have me to follow his stagecoach on sir Kr0b were it not for my intestinal (gut) feelings on sir Hoppster.

[Twistedspoon]

your new monocle is most spiffing, Sir Him

[kr0b]

This is most interesting. I am the subject of a vote, it appears, but for what reason that is not to be seen on others? That I cannot tell. I echoed a point?

Perhaps

I simply agreed. And if one is t regard Post #71 as a fluff post, then one must also consider both of kpaca's posts' "fluff posts". Perhaps a special exception is made for myself, or perhaps Imaginality is simply brushing over and not considering the legitimacy of kpaca's posts because the young gentleman has only just arrived to the proceedings. Either way, I find it most peculiar to see Imaginality picking and choosing which posts he perceives as "fluff". Maybe the good sir needs to lay off of his whiskey.

Non-commital language of this type is a scumtell. An honorable gentleman would be able to state with certainty that he simply agreed. A scoundrel who echoed the other fellow's point to save him from the need to think independently and shield him from standing out from the crowd would also like to say with certainty that he simply agreed, but the remaining shreds of his conscience halt his tongue and all he can utter is a stammering, "Per-per-haps, I agreed, maybe; that could be true, right?"

kpaca's next posts will certainly be of interest to me, but in terms of my attitude towards fluff posts, there is no difference between the leniency I have shown towards his opening posts, and my same allowance for your contentless posts iso#0 to iso#2. Your cry of hypocrisy is unfounded.

And you have still yet to make any contribution of note. Suggesting kpaca contributes more, less than a day after he has arrived at our gathering, is hardly the type of incisive scum-hunting that will help us unmask and vanquish the rogues amongst us.

Whilst this post is, for the most part, of sound reasoning, I find the fact you would seriously try to point out my sarcastic use of the word 'perhaps' to be somewhat a decent reason to point your gnarled finger at me to be a farce. Absolute balderdash! Merely trying to solidify your reasons for voting for me.

Non-committal though? Let's look at everyone, shall we good sir? And shall we ponder the committed nature of everybody else's posts throughout this game in accordance to the pre-determined theme?

[Apokalyptika]

Welcome to the lodge, Sir DemonHybrid! I could only wish it were in happier circumstances, in which you were not voting for myself. I fear you have erroneously judged me as defending Sir Vezok. In actuality, I have no particular opinion of the gentleman as of yet. As I stated before, I have a most strong personal opposition to the policy of ejecting lodge members based on factors other than their gentlemanliness or lack thereof, unless there is an exceedingly strong reason to do so. I do not believe that a necessarily strong reason exists, so I object to this policy.

TheLonging continues to draw suspicion to himself by insisting on adherence to this daft policy; at least others have made tentative steps towards a body of evidence against him. Bearing no malice towards Sir kpaca, I must still note that thus far he has spoken less of serious subjects than Sir vezok. However, I see nobody measuring his neck for a hempen necktie.

imaginality's response has done much to allay my suspicions. krob, I must request that you clarify the last sentence you uttered. I understand it to mean that, since gentlemen do not often make rash statements, you maintain that you were not being weak but rather adhering to the standards of high breeding. Am I correct in my understanding?

In summary, I shall

Unvote

and

Vote: TheLonging

.

[kr0b]

Which needs clarifying good fellow?

[Apokalyptika]

And shall we ponder the committed nature of everybody else's posts throughout this game in accordance to the pre-determined theme?

This sentence, if you would be so kind, Sir kr0b.