EA Forums - Banner

Simpsons: The Conspiracy Game ~ Homeland - CONGRATULATIONS SPRINGFIELDERS

Replies

  • mr_skeltal_80
    18104 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    Wijsheid wrote:
    I'll be gone a couple of hours.

    Same here. I might post a bit here and there today but nothing much. Busy day and i think my wife would appreciate it if we could just watch a flim tonight instead of checking the forum every other minute. :lol:
  • Wijsheid
    9653 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    We'll see. I am not even sure you are a villain brandonl1226. I just grasp every reason i can since there are so little leads.
  • KrisV
    1840 posts
    edited August 2014
    I probably wont be around much as well today either. Gonna spend my day rushing to get Trine 2 done recording so I can start on TLOU! :D
  • brandonl1226
    5831 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    Wijsheid wrote:
    We'll see. I am not even sure you are a villain brandonl1226. I just grasp every reason i can since there are so little leads.

    Fair enough. I'm not a villain and I'm sure everyone will see that again.
  • juliet603
    17879 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    Proaluu obviously defended Wilki to try and look innocent. Because only a normal springfielder would bother to defend someone, a villain would be happy to see anyone but him and his partner get kicked out... Right?

    Thats exactly what he wanted us to think! The lesson learned is, don't trust anybody! :shock:

  • KrisV
    1840 posts
    edited August 2014
    proallu123 wrote:
    Okay this might be a long one. So let's start. Sorry if I get my he's and she's mixed up!

    wilki1999: wilki has played aggressively and that seems to be his game style. He has brought up some good theories, but has start to become (at least try to become) some sort of a leader. This started a few pages ago. He is trying to suppress other players to come out as the greater one and people would listen to who he is voting for, IMO. Aggressive gamestyle doesn't mean that you're a villain, but this isn't even aggressive anymore. Aggressive would be to question and bring the heat to get answers - wilki isn' even asking any.

    anettemarc: Bringing good theories and opinions to the table. I don't think a villain would be such an open book. She is taking notes and reading the other thread and seems to be a pro at this. Gotta say, no offense to you others, I think she's the best player of us ;D

    KrisV: Hasn't really talked much, because of medical conditions - maybe it's all a scam!! Nah, just kidding, get well soon.

    brandonl2996: He started of joking/hinting about being an alien - now here's why I don't think he's a villain: first of all, a villain wouldn't be so stupid, that he would just go out and hint about being an alien and secondly, he didn't even defend himself. I think a villain's mate would have come up with some defend-material by now if the accused wouldn't have himself. Brandon seems to be on the attitude: go ahead, vote me out, you'll see I'm not the villain. Remember, this is not benefitial to the redt of us Springfielders, it makes no sense. You're a Springfielder? Get out, no way! No, speak up, because we don't want to loose a Springfielder just because they are too lazy to protect their selves.

    theslayer369: The slayer posts messages here and there - not really inactive, but not really active. In the beginning she was "joking". Now I know what you'll say, well why wasn't brandon then joking? Heres why: slayers joking was OBVIOUS joking. Now, of I'd say something like: "Maybe I'm a villain, may'be I'm not :wink: " People would be all: no way, a villain wouldn't be so stupid and: the wink clearly means she's joking. She's still quite neutral, but we'll see.

    barrymcerlea: He's in all way possible neutral. Haven't seen anything fishy in his messages, but he's not trying to ride underthe mass, which by the way is pretty easy with 20 players.

    Wijsheid: Now he's a tricky case. People keep telling about the tongue tangling. But I don't see that: there hasn't been a night yet. The names are sent to the GL during the night, but there hasn't been a niht yet. I think Wijsheid is red-herring us with this. He says it's to be neutral, but surely he guessed someone would have grabbed on to it?

    eliansukke180: Hasn't been very active compared to the previous thread. I think he's not a villain because he has such a different game style than in the last game (where he was a villain). Maybe he was hyped about being a villain in the last game and that's the reason he was so active and now he got to be a springfielder and is kinda bored.

    stingray1122: Like the previous ex-villain, he has been rather inactive in this game. Again I think he's being quiet for the same reason as elian.

    Timescola: It kinda looks like Timescola is trying to go under the radar here. Why is that, since he was very actove in the previous game: my theory to this is the opposite of elian and stingray: he's a villain and trying to keep a low profile.

    juliet603: Seems to be pretty open about her theories and opinions. I don't think a villain would be do open.

    Aiddan: Aiddan is a new player in the consipracy games and a new forum user. He seems to be pretty active and open about his opinions.

    Jblue8698: Honestly, I think she's been pretty neutral - nothing fishy, but nothing to prove to me that she's a Springfielder.

    crosby376: Been pretty inactive - not much to say.

    jae_bazz: jae_bazz seemed to start this wilki wagon, so if wilki turns out to be a villain, I think jae is in clear waters. Other wise been pretty active and open.

    johnny50373: Same as jblue - pretty neutral to me.

    Nilmade: Not much to say, other than sweet avatar!

    lynnmckenz82: Same as johnny and jblue. Pretty neutral.


    Guys I just noticed something. Why is henpot not on his list?

    Edit: This list of his was made before anyone was eliminated.
  • proallu123
    98 posts
    edited August 2014
    KrisV wrote:
    proallu123 wrote:
    Okay this might be a long one. So let's start. Sorry if I get my he's and she's mixed up!

    wilki1999: wilki has played aggressively and that seems to be his game style. He has brought up some good theories, but has start to become (at least try to become) some sort of a leader. This started a few pages ago. He is trying to suppress other players to come out as the greater one and people would listen to who he is voting for, IMO. Aggressive gamestyle doesn't mean that you're a villain, but this isn't even aggressive anymore. Aggressive would be to question and bring the heat to get answers - wilki isn' even asking any.

    anettemarc: Bringing good theories and opinions to the table. I don't think a villain would be such an open book. She is taking notes and reading the other thread and seems to be a pro at this. Gotta say, no offense to you others, I think she's the best player of us ;D

    KrisV: Hasn't really talked much, because of medical conditions - maybe it's all a scam!! Nah, just kidding, get well soon.

    brandonl2996: He started of joking/hinting about being an alien - now here's why I don't think he's a villain: first of all, a villain wouldn't be so stupid, that he would just go out and hint about being an alien and secondly, he didn't even defend himself. I think a villain's mate would have come up with some defend-material by now if the accused wouldn't have himself. Brandon seems to be on the attitude: go ahead, vote me out, you'll see I'm not the villain. Remember, this is not benefitial to the redt of us Springfielders, it makes no sense. You're a Springfielder? Get out, no way! No, speak up, because we don't want to loose a Springfielder just because they are too lazy to protect their selves.

    theslayer369: The slayer posts messages here and there - not really inactive, but not really active. In the beginning she was "joking". Now I know what you'll say, well why wasn't brandon then joking? Heres why: slayers joking was OBVIOUS joking. Now, of I'd say something like: "Maybe I'm a villain, may'be I'm not :wink: " People would be all: no way, a villain wouldn't be so stupid and: the wink clearly means she's joking. She's still quite neutral, but we'll see.

    barrymcerlea: He's in all way possible neutral. Haven't seen anything fishy in his messages, but he's not trying to ride underthe mass, which by the way is pretty easy with 20 players.

    Wijsheid: Now he's a tricky case. People keep telling about the tongue tangling. But I don't see that: there hasn't been a night yet. The names are sent to the GL during the night, but there hasn't been a niht yet. I think Wijsheid is red-herring us with this. He says it's to be neutral, but surely he guessed someone would have grabbed on to it?

    eliansukke180: Hasn't been very active compared to the previous thread. I think he's not a villain because he has such a different game style than in the last game (where he was a villain). Maybe he was hyped about being a villain in the last game and that's the reason he was so active and now he got to be a springfielder and is kinda bored.

    stingray1122: Like the previous ex-villain, he has been rather inactive in this game. Again I think he's being quiet for the same reason as elian.

    Timescola: It kinda looks like Timescola is trying to go under the radar here. Why is that, since he was very actove in the previous game: my theory to this is the opposite of elian and stingray: he's a villain and trying to keep a low profile.

    juliet603: Seems to be pretty open about her theories and opinions. I don't think a villain would be do open.

    Aiddan: Aiddan is a new player in the consipracy games and a new forum user. He seems to be pretty active and open about his opinions.

    Jblue8698: Honestly, I think she's been pretty neutral - nothing fishy, but nothing to prove to me that she's a Springfielder.

    crosby376: Been pretty inactive - not much to say.

    jae_bazz: jae_bazz seemed to start this wilki wagon, so if wilki turns out to be a villain, I think jae is in clear waters. Other wise been pretty active and open.

    johnny50373: Same as jblue - pretty neutral to me.

    Nilmade: Not much to say, other than sweet avatar!

    lynnmckenz82: Same as johnny and jblue. Pretty neutral.


    Guys I just noticed something. Why is henpot not on his list?

    Edit: This list of his was made before anyone was eliminated.

    That's old info, i missed her. It was Already brought up. Keep up, Kris ;)
  • stingray1122
    8717 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    5660_52c4.gif
  • KrisV
    1840 posts
    edited August 2014
    proallu123 wrote:
    KrisV wrote:
    proallu123 wrote:
    Okay this might be a long one. So let's start. Sorry if I get my he's and she's mixed up!

    wilki1999: wilki has played aggressively and that seems to be his game style. He has brought up some good theories, but has start to become (at least try to become) some sort of a leader. This started a few pages ago. He is trying to suppress other players to come out as the greater one and people would listen to who he is voting for, IMO. Aggressive gamestyle doesn't mean that you're a villain, but this isn't even aggressive anymore. Aggressive would be to question and bring the heat to get answers - wilki isn' even asking any.

    anettemarc: Bringing good theories and opinions to the table. I don't think a villain would be such an open book. She is taking notes and reading the other thread and seems to be a pro at this. Gotta say, no offense to you others, I think she's the best player of us ;D

    KrisV: Hasn't really talked much, because of medical conditions - maybe it's all a scam!! Nah, just kidding, get well soon.

    brandonl2996: He started of joking/hinting about being an alien - now here's why I don't think he's a villain: first of all, a villain wouldn't be so stupid, that he would just go out and hint about being an alien and secondly, he didn't even defend himself. I think a villain's mate would have come up with some defend-material by now if the accused wouldn't have himself. Brandon seems to be on the attitude: go ahead, vote me out, you'll see I'm not the villain. Remember, this is not benefitial to the redt of us Springfielders, it makes no sense. You're a Springfielder? Get out, no way! No, speak up, because we don't want to loose a Springfielder just because they are too lazy to protect their selves.

    theslayer369: The slayer posts messages here and there - not really inactive, but not really active. In the beginning she was "joking". Now I know what you'll say, well why wasn't brandon then joking? Heres why: slayers joking was OBVIOUS joking. Now, of I'd say something like: "Maybe I'm a villain, may'be I'm not :wink: " People would be all: no way, a villain wouldn't be so stupid and: the wink clearly means she's joking. She's still quite neutral, but we'll see.

    barrymcerlea: He's in all way possible neutral. Haven't seen anything fishy in his messages, but he's not trying to ride underthe mass, which by the way is pretty easy with 20 players.

    Wijsheid: Now he's a tricky case. People keep telling about the tongue tangling. But I don't see that: there hasn't been a night yet. The names are sent to the GL during the night, but there hasn't been a niht yet. I think Wijsheid is red-herring us with this. He says it's to be neutral, but surely he guessed someone would have grabbed on to it?

    eliansukke180: Hasn't been very active compared to the previous thread. I think he's not a villain because he has such a different game style than in the last game (where he was a villain). Maybe he was hyped about being a villain in the last game and that's the reason he was so active and now he got to be a springfielder and is kinda bored.

    stingray1122: Like the previous ex-villain, he has been rather inactive in this game. Again I think he's being quiet for the same reason as elian.

    Timescola: It kinda looks like Timescola is trying to go under the radar here. Why is that, since he was very actove in the previous game: my theory to this is the opposite of elian and stingray: he's a villain and trying to keep a low profile.

    juliet603: Seems to be pretty open about her theories and opinions. I don't think a villain would be do open.

    Aiddan: Aiddan is a new player in the consipracy games and a new forum user. He seems to be pretty active and open about his opinions.

    Jblue8698: Honestly, I think she's been pretty neutral - nothing fishy, but nothing to prove to me that she's a Springfielder.

    crosby376: Been pretty inactive - not much to say.

    jae_bazz: jae_bazz seemed to start this wilki wagon, so if wilki turns out to be a villain, I think jae is in clear waters. Other wise been pretty active and open.

    johnny50373: Same as jblue - pretty neutral to me.

    Nilmade: Not much to say, other than sweet avatar!

    lynnmckenz82: Same as johnny and jblue. Pretty neutral.


    Guys I just noticed something. Why is henpot not on his list?

    Edit: This list of his was made before anyone was eliminated.

    That's old info, i missed her. It was Already brought up. Keep up, Kris ;)

    I dont believe anything a villain says. Dont make me call the ghostbusters to capture you cause I will!
  • juliet603
    17879 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    OK, I noticed this yesterday and for me this is a way of removing some people from our list of suspects... Bear with me.

    So yesterday, Aiddan put a list up of possible characters, he based this off the names the GL had used in morning and evening messages, but I noticed my name wasn't on it so I said it couldn't be accurate. Several more people agreed with this.

    If these people aren't on the list then it looks like they are also not villains, as the only reason people pointed it out was to say that the list wasn't accurate, and after all, the villains WERE on the list.

    The people whose characters weren't on it were me, Jae_Bazz, Lynn, Elian, Crosby, slayer and henpot.

    That leaves Aiddan, Wijsheid, barrymcerlea, Johnny, brandon, Kris, nilmade and annette

    It's my belief that 3 of these people are the remaining villains, plus Bart = 4.

    I know a couple of you (especially if you're a villain) will probably now say "I wasnt on the list either" and you might be telling the truth, but because this is being said after I've told you my theory I'm not going to believe it for now.

    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • Jblue8298
    7994 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    proallu123 wrote:
    That's old info, i missed her. It was Already brought up. Keep up, Kris ;)
    Ghosts can't talk! Come with us ghost

    AncientCarefulAnaconda.gif
  • annettemarc
    7747 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    KrisV wrote:

    Why would Proallu defend someone when he himself turned out to be a villain? If anything he should of wanted the protector gone, which now we know Wilki was in fact the protector. Specially since the protector was able to ruin his target at night! Was it to throw people off? Perhaps. I thought, like the others, Proallu was innocent because he was working hard to put together lists, and examine everyone closely. And like others I was fooled. If I was confident in my thinking of you being a villain, I would of voted for you when I said that but I didnt. Its just a theory I had.

    Kris, I disagree with your conclusion.

    However, I strongly agree with ONE part of your post. In reference to the red bold sentence ... I believe they allowed wilki to survive because it WAS to throw us off. The stonecutters knew very well that leaving wilki alive put a huge target on his back, and that we would instantly assume he was one of the stonecutters. They would let us do their dirty work for them.

    As Juliet said, the odds were very very small that the person the Stonecutters decided to target would "happen" to be the person that wilki would protect. ... and I disagreed with Juliet, saying I did not think that they would take ANY risk. (Sorry Juliet. I should have bowed to your experience. Oops.)

    Letting the protector live through the night, knowing that he'd have a huge target on his back in the daytime and headed for the slaughterhouse, served the Stonecutters two purposes:

    FIRST, they got to use their "kill" for another victim, knowing -- at the least -- that it was going to be a Springfielder, and -- at the best -- it would be one of the aliens. So, I'm not convinced at all that there was any particular reason for them to target the lovers (whichever one was the actual target) ... I think they were just killing for the sake of eliminating ANYBODY.

    SECOND, and most importantly IMHO, the two Stonecutters would be safe from conversation for the next two days, as the firestorm against wilki raged. I remember on several occasions people posted that there were three more villains out there and that maybe we should at least be looking for them, once we had agreed en masse that wilki was already a dead man. We spent very little time doing that. And I was one of the biggest offenders in that regard.


    The Stonecutters were right. As I said in my first post on the morning wilki had survived -- the stonecutters sure fooled me. Then I voted for wilki. The Stonecutters must have spent those two days watching us, in hysterical laughter. I'd love someday to see the PMs they were exchanging. I bet they were having a blast.

    I DO agree that the other Stonecutter MIGHT be someone who, like Proallu, did not vote against wilki. But, that would have been a huge risk. Proallu stood out from the pack, and perhaps that made him a target for the Aliens. They figured he may be trying to pull off a double bluff.

    But when it comes to the OTHER Stonecutter, can we assume they wanted BOTH of them to stand out? Wouldn't they want to put distance between one another? I'd assume the second Stonecutter would be someone who put in a vote against wilki -- not at the beginning of the deluge and not at the very end -- but somewhere in the middle of the pack. Trying to blend in.

    But I don't trust my judgment enough to be sure. The Stonecutters are dang smart. Are they bold enough to try to pull off a TRIPLE bluff? I don't know.
    USA/UK Race To Throw Country Into Utter Chaos = TOO CLOSE TO CALL
  • stingray1122
    8717 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    Jblue8298 wrote:
    proallu123 wrote:
    That's old info, i missed her. It was Already brought up. Keep up, Kris ;)
    Ghosts can't talk! Come with us ghost

    AncientCarefulAnaconda.gif

    A reference to the oooooold horror movie freaks....ahem I mean oooooo....*ghost sounds*

    truth.gif
  • annettemarc
    7747 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    juliet603 wrote:
    OK, I noticed this yesterday and for me this is a way of removing some people from our list of suspects... Bear with me.

    So yesterday, Aiddan put a list up of possible characters, he based this off the names the GL had used in morning and evening messages, but I noticed my name wasn't on it so I said it couldn't be accurate. Several more people agreed with this.

    If these people aren't on the list then it looks like they are also not villains, as the only reason people pointed it out was to say that the list wasn't accurate, and after all, the villains WERE on the list.

    The people whose characters weren't on it were me, Lynn, Elian, Crosby, slayer and henpot.

    That leaves Aiddan, Wijsheid, barrymcerlea, Johnny, brandon, Kris, nilmade, annette and Jae_bazz

    It's my belief that 3 of these people are the remaining villains, plus Bart = 4.

    I know a couple of you (especially if you're a villain) will probably now say "I wasnt on the list either" and you might be telling the truth, but because this is being said after I've told you my theory I'm not going to believe it for now.

    You might want to make another category. "People who already stated that they ARE on the list."

    So far, I'm the only one. I feel so special(?) Ack. :shock: :(
    USA/UK Race To Throw Country Into Utter Chaos = TOO CLOSE TO CALL
  • theslayer369
    2002 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    KrisV wrote:

    Why would Proallu defend someone when he himself turned out to be a villain? If anything he should of wanted the protector gone, which now we know Wilki was in fact the protector. Specially since the protector was able to ruin his target at night! Was it to throw people off? Perhaps. I thought, like the others, Proallu was innocent because he was working hard to put together lists, and examine everyone closely. And like others I was fooled. If I was confident in my thinking of you being a villain, I would of voted for you when I said that but I didnt. Its just a theory I had.

    Kris, I disagree with your conclusion.

    However, I strongly agree with ONE part of your post. In reference to the red bold sentence ... I believe they allowed wilki to survive because it WAS to throw us off. The stonecutters knew very well that leaving wilki alive put a huge target on his back, and that we would instantly assume he was one of the stonecutters. They would let us do their dirty work for them.

    As Juliet said, the odds were very very small that the person the Stonecutters decided to target would "happen" to be the person that wilki would protect. ... and I disagreed with Juliet, saying I did not think that they would take ANY risk. (Sorry Juliet. I should have bowed to your experience. Oops.)

    Letting the protector live through the night, knowing that he'd have a huge target on his back in the daytime and headed for the slaughterhouse, served the Stonecutters two purposes:

    FIRST, they got to use their "kill" for another victim, knowing -- at the least -- that it was going to be a Springfielder, and -- at the best -- it would be one of the aliens. So, I'm not convinced at all that there was any particular reason for them to target the lovers (whichever one was the actual target) ... I think they were just killing for the sake of eliminating ANYBODY.

    SECOND, and most importantly IMHO, the two Stonecutters would be safe from conversation for the next two days, as the firestorm against wilki raged. I remember on several occasions people posted that there were three more villains out there and that maybe we should at least be looking for them, once we had agreed en masse that wilki was already a dead man. We spent very little time doing that. And I was one of the biggest offenders in that regard.


    The Stonecutters were right. As I said in my first post on the morning wilki had survived -- the stonecutters sure fooled me. Then I voted for wilki. The Stonecutters must have spent those two days watching us, in hysterical laughter. I'd love someday to see the PMs they were exchanging. I bet they were having a blast.

    I DO agree that the other Stonecutter MIGHT be someone who, like Proallu, did not vote against wilki. But, that would have been a huge risk. Proallu stood out from the pack, and perhaps that made him a target for the Aliens. They figured he may be trying to pull off a double bluff.

    But when it comes to the OTHER Stonecutter, can we assume they wanted BOTH of them to stand out? Wouldn't they want to put distance between one another? I'd assume the second Stonecutter would be someone who put in a vote against wilki -- not at the beginning of the deluge and not at the very end -- but somewhere in the middle of the pack. Trying to blend in.

    But I don't trust my judgment enough to be sure. The Stonecutters are dang smart. Are they bold enough to try to pull off a TRIPLE bluff? I don't know.

    Just come back taken me ages to catch up the posts. Its very interesting what you say annette, also Juliets. I need to digest what you say.

    Someone said I can't remember who, in an earlier post that proallu went to a lot of trouble making his list considering he was a villian

    Who else demands lists/ activity posts?
  • juliet603
    17879 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    juliet603 wrote:
    OK, I noticed this yesterday and for me this is a way of removing some people from our list of suspects... Bear with me.

    So yesterday, Aiddan put a list up of possible characters, he based this off the names the GL had used in morning and evening messages, but I noticed my name wasn't on it so I said it couldn't be accurate. Several more people agreed with this.

    If these people aren't on the list then it looks like they are also not villains, as the only reason people pointed it out was to say that the list wasn't accurate, and after all, the villains WERE on the list.

    The people whose characters weren't on it were me, Lynn, Elian, Crosby, slayer and henpot.

    That leaves Aiddan, Wijsheid, barrymcerlea, Johnny, brandon, Kris, nilmade, annette and Jae_bazz

    It's my belief that 3 of these people are the remaining villains, plus Bart = 4.

    I know a couple of you (especially if you're a villain) will probably now say "I wasnt on the list either" and you might be telling the truth, but because this is being said after I've told you my theory I'm not going to believe it for now.

    You might want to make another category. "People who already stated that they ARE on the list."

    So far, I'm the only one. I feel so special(?) Ack. :shock: :(

    You and Aiddan (I'm presuming anyway seeing as he made the list and would probably have thought to mention it if his own name wasn't even there!)

    But I don't think you are a villain Annette!
  • juliet603
    17879 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    KrisV wrote:

    Why would Proallu defend someone when he himself turned out to be a villain? If anything he should of wanted the protector gone, which now we know Wilki was in fact the protector. Specially since the protector was able to ruin his target at night! Was it to throw people off? Perhaps. I thought, like the others, Proallu was innocent because he was working hard to put together lists, and examine everyone closely. And like others I was fooled. If I was confident in my thinking of you being a villain, I would of voted for you when I said that but I didnt. Its just a theory I had.

    Kris, I disagree with your conclusion.

    However, I strongly agree with ONE part of your post. In reference to the red bold sentence ... I believe they allowed wilki to survive because it WAS to throw us off. The stonecutters knew very well that leaving wilki alive put a huge target on his back, and that we would instantly assume he was one of the stonecutters. They would let us do their dirty work for them.

    As Juliet said, the odds were very very small that the person the Stonecutters decided to target would "happen" to be the person that wilki would protect. ... and I disagreed with Juliet, saying I did not think that they would take ANY risk. (Sorry Juliet. I should have bowed to your experience. Oops.)

    Letting the protector live through the night, knowing that he'd have a huge target on his back in the daytime and headed for the slaughterhouse, served the Stonecutters two purposes:

    FIRST, they got to use their "kill" for another victim, knowing -- at the least -- that it was going to be a Springfielder, and -- at the best -- it would be one of the aliens. So, I'm not convinced at all that there was any particular reason for them to target the lovers (whichever one was the actual target) ... I think they were just killing for the sake of eliminating ANYBODY.

    SECOND, and most importantly IMHO, the two Stonecutters would be safe from conversation for the next two days, as the firestorm against wilki raged. I remember on several occasions people posted that there were three more villains out there and that maybe we should at least be looking for them, once we had agreed en masse that wilki was already a dead man. We spent very little time doing that. And I was one of the biggest offenders in that regard.


    The Stonecutters were right. As I said in my first post on the morning wilki had survived -- the stonecutters sure fooled me. Then I voted for wilki. The Stonecutters must have spent those two days watching us, in hysterical laughter. I'd love someday to see the PMs they were exchanging. I bet they were having a blast.

    I DO agree that the other Stonecutter MIGHT be someone who, like Proallu, did not vote against wilki. But, that would have been a huge risk. Proallu stood out from the pack, and perhaps that made him a target for the Aliens. They figured he may be trying to pull off a double bluff.

    But when it comes to the OTHER Stonecutter, can we assume they wanted BOTH of them to stand out? Wouldn't they want to put distance between one another? I'd assume the second Stonecutter would be someone who put in a vote against wilki -- not at the beginning of the deluge and not at the very end -- but somewhere in the middle of the pack. Trying to blend in.

    But I don't trust my judgment enough to be sure. The Stonecutters are dang smart. Are they bold enough to try to pull off a TRIPLE bluff? I don't know.

    Just come back taken me ages to catch up the posts. Its very interesting what you say annette, also Juliets. I need to digest what you say.

    Someone said I can't remember who, in an earlier post that proallu went to a lot of trouble making his list considering he was a villian

    Who else demands lists/ activity posts?

    Johnny has mentioned posts before, suggesting lesser posting players could be villains.
  • barrymcerlea
    2095 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    17 people left

    Four are villains
    one that is bart
    Twelve are Springfielder's (one protector(maybe), one coward(maybe), one prophet(maybe), one tongue tangler, and a speculated special that is Lisa

    Characters used
    Kodos - Villain
    Kang - Villain
    Number 1 - Villain
    Number 51 - Villain
    Bart - Traitor

    Going by the morning messages and evening messages, we have clues to others

    Lisa - Possibly makes Bart a good guy
    Rev. Lovejoy - ?
    Rabbi Krustofski - ? (note in message it said he leaves the church)
    Edna Krabapple - ?
    Moe Szylack - ?
    Miss Springfield - ?
    Martha Quimby - ?
    Mayor Quimby - ?
    Marge - ?
    Snake - ?
    Wolfcastle - ?
    Eddie - ?
    Lou - ?
    The Sea Captain - ?
    Mr. Burns - ?
    Homer - ?



    @Juliet there's quite a few possible Springfielders on here. I think we can safely assume that there will be a Homer, Lisa and Marge. Don't write us off just because we're on the list :lol:
  • henpot7514
    6010 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    juliet603 wrote:
    KrisV wrote:

    Why would Proallu defend someone when he himself turned out to be a villain? If anything he should of wanted the protector gone, which now we know Wilki was in fact the protector. Specially since the protector was able to ruin his target at night! Was it to throw people off? Perhaps. I thought, like the others, Proallu was innocent because he was working hard to put together lists, and examine everyone closely. And like others I was fooled. If I was confident in my thinking of you being a villain, I would of voted for you when I said that but I didnt. Its just a theory I had.

    Kris, I disagree with your conclusion.

    However, I strongly agree with ONE part of your post. In reference to the red bold sentence ... I believe they allowed wilki to survive because it WAS to throw us off. The stonecutters knew very well that leaving wilki alive put a huge target on his back, and that we would instantly assume he was one of the stonecutters. They would let us do their dirty work for them.

    As Juliet said, the odds were very very small that the person the Stonecutters decided to target would "happen" to be the person that wilki would protect. ... and I disagreed with Juliet, saying I did not think that they would take ANY risk. (Sorry Juliet. I should have bowed to your experience. Oops.)

    Letting the protector live through the night, knowing that he'd have a huge target on his back in the daytime and headed for the slaughterhouse, served the Stonecutters two purposes:

    FIRST, they got to use their "kill" for another victim, knowing -- at the least -- that it was going to be a Springfielder, and -- at the best -- it would be one of the aliens. So, I'm not convinced at all that there was any particular reason for them to target the lovers (whichever one was the actual target) ... I think they were just killing for the sake of eliminating ANYBODY.

    SECOND, and most importantly IMHO, the two Stonecutters would be safe from conversation for the next two days, as the firestorm against wilki raged. I remember on several occasions people posted that there were three more villains out there and that maybe we should at least be looking for them, once we had agreed en masse that wilki was already a dead man. We spent very little time doing that. And I was one of the biggest offenders in that regard.


    The Stonecutters were right. As I said in my first post on the morning wilki had survived -- the stonecutters sure fooled me. Then I voted for wilki. The Stonecutters must have spent those two days watching us, in hysterical laughter. I'd love someday to see the PMs they were exchanging. I bet they were having a blast.

    I DO agree that the other Stonecutter MIGHT be someone who, like Proallu, did not vote against wilki. But, that would have been a huge risk. Proallu stood out from the pack, and perhaps that made him a target for the Aliens. They figured he may be trying to pull off a double bluff.

    But when it comes to the OTHER Stonecutter, can we assume they wanted BOTH of them to stand out? Wouldn't they want to put distance between one another? I'd assume the second Stonecutter would be someone who put in a vote against wilki -- not at the beginning of the deluge and not at the very end -- but somewhere in the middle of the pack. Trying to blend in.

    But I don't trust my judgment enough to be sure. The Stonecutters are dang smart. Are they bold enough to try to pull off a TRIPLE bluff? I don't know.

    Just come back taken me ages to catch up the posts. Its very interesting what you say annette, also Juliets. I need to digest what you say.

    Someone said I can't remember who, in an earlier post that proallu went to a lot of trouble making his list considering he was a villian

    Who else demands lists/ activity posts?

    Johnny has mentioned posts before, suggesting lesser posting players could be villains.

    I think this could be true also. There are some who just aren't trying hard enough to find the villains
  • juliet603
    17879 posts Member
    edited August 2014
    17 people left

    Four are villains
    one that is bart
    Twelve are Springfielder's (one protector(maybe), one coward(maybe), one prophet(maybe), one tongue tangler, and a speculated special that is Lisa

    Characters used
    Kodos - Villain
    Kang - Villain
    Number 1 - Villain
    Number 51 - Villain
    Bart - Traitor

    Going by the morning messages and evening messages, we have clues to others

    Lisa - Possibly makes Bart a good guy
    Rev. Lovejoy - ?
    Rabbi Krustofski - ? (note in message it said he leaves the church)
    Edna Krabapple - ?
    Moe Szylack - ?
    Miss Springfield - ?
    Martha Quimby - ?
    Mayor Quimby - ?
    Marge - ?
    Snake - ?
    Wolfcastle - ?
    Eddie - ?
    Lou - ?
    The Sea Captain - ?
    Mr. Burns - ?
    Homer - ?



    @Juliet there's quite a few possible Springfielders on here. I think we can safely assume that there will be a Homer, Lisa and Marge. Don't write us off just because we're on the list :lol:

    I know! :-) There are 8 people who haven't said they're not on the list, and only 3 (or 4 including bart) of those will be bad! That means 4 or 5 of you are good!
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.