reidentify | week 3 ( monday );

[Meeting in the longhouse is a go! Lief clears his throat, as a part of him wonders how he keeps ending up in this situation, but:]

Thank you all for gathering here. These past few weeks have been difficult, but I pray that none of us fall into despair. Now, more than ever, we need to keep our spirits up and put an end to this twisted game.

Vriska and Kirigiri have asked that we take advantage of our time now to discuss our next course of action, without an immediate deadline constraining us, driving us to ill temper. As we have struggled with how we should approach the trial, perhaps we should focus on the roles—the ones with the purpose to kill.

In particular, what sort of people would the Chiefs place in such a role? Not necessarily who would kill, normally, but who would be the Chiefs' "ideal" candidates. That is what we wish to figure out.

... Of course, we may not come to a complete agreement. But perhaps we will walk away from this with a better idea of how to go on from here, if nothing else.

[ooc: basically, a mingle post to discuss stuff! top-level and hijack away, etc.]

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

...Most people have some sort of lever. As long as you know what it is...

Break a person enough and you have prime motivation to kill.

Although based on what we've seen so far-- [ one kill, because the Chiefs don't count ] someone who can slip under the radar. If we're also going with what Serph said earlier as well, someone who we wouldn't expect to normally kill.

[ turning expectations on its head and all. ]

...The expectation of "would" or "wouldn't" normally kill is a little strange, anyway.

[ he'll shrug. ] First impressions do lie.

I'm just pointing out that if we go with the definition of entertainment, someone who you wouldn't normally expect to be able to kill in such grisly ways would be the best candidate.

[ She'll nod at Lelouch. hey buddy. ]

To be honest, this is exactly what I've been thinking. Handing a knife to a total innocent and telling them to kill, and not giving them a way out of it? I'm sure they'd consider that pure gold.

Edited 2017-08-22 02:04 (UTC)

...As I said, pretty much anyone can be driven to it. A total innocent isn't really a thing that fully exists.

I don't mean morally. More like someone who has never killed or maybe even seriously hurt anyone in their life! Someone whose hands are clean. I'm sure the Chiefs would think it was hilarious to fuck up that kind of person by making them murder.

That's more or less what I meant...I simply think it wouldn't be that difficult to drive most people into that sort of mindset, given the powers and knowledge they presumably have, nothing further.

[ a nod, and a humorless smile. ]

I agree. Whatever incentive the Chiefs are using doesn't necessarily have to be material! Threaten to kill someone they love. Worse, threaten to save someone they love from certain doom! Anyone with a good heart would have a tough time saying no.

... Indeed. It is easy to claim that you would never fall so low, but there are many situations where one realizes they are not who they thought they were.

(no subject)

evidentiary - 2017-08-23 00:52 (UTC) - Expand

[ yo. let's try not to fight this time. ]

If we're going with that scenario, I suppose it would be entertaining enough until whoever they'd nominated to kill decided to find a way out.

[ it's not that easy to murder??? not everyone is thirsty for murder like we are jfc. ]

We've seen how well trying to find loopholes in the voting system works. I can't imagine there wouldn't be similar care taken with the incentives.

[ Casually throwing out that "well just find a way out!" sounds about to him like if someone came up to him and went "so, have you tried not being a cannibalistic demon shape-shifter?" Everything sounds easier on paper. ]

I actually agree on that point - although just based on how loopholes in the voting system were taken care of, I would imagine that there's nothing to stop them from finding an out until they attempted to.

[ like. they only instituted the no voting for partner rules after two weeks, and not on the outset. that's what irks him, the rules changing along the way thing. ]

Having to kill someone, and weekly, takes its toll on a person. Unless they're an emotionless bastard but just based on the people here I highly doubt that is the case.

The mask will crack eventually, somehow.

So like what, someone people would trust a lot and not think twice about? [That's even worse what the fuck.]

Essentially.

[ listen. his sister was the one who fired nuclear weapons at entire countries, he knows exactly what he's talking about. ]

Which means we have to really be careful what we're asking and not skip over anybody from now on when we're in trials.

But then there's the secondary problem of not knowing what most people's levers are.

It can generally be hard to find out until after the fact. The point is...I don't think anyone could be discounted from it so easily as "they don't seem the type".

Everybody has something and if there's any way to figure out a pattern of what those somethings are, maybe we'd stand a chance.

Knowing what limits, if any, exist on the incentives they can offer would help.

If they managed to bring us all here, somehow I don't think they have a whole lot of limits to work with. But that's true, too. We could try asking, but we should have a back-up plan too.

We lose nothing by asking, so we may as well...the worst they do is laugh or refuse to answer, when it comes to questions. Unless you ask things about the rules and suggest alternatives...

The one problem I see with suggesting alternatives is that they'd backfire on us, so we really should be careful about what we say to them.

I don't disagree. Some of the things brought up have locked us out of safety nets we could have used.

The last thing we need is to plant worse ideas in their heads. So...we should be on guard until we see the perfect opening. Whatever that is.

evidentiary - 2017-08-24 17:35 (UTC) - Expand

zerotohiro - 2017-08-24 19:11 (UTC) - Expand

evidentiary - 2017-08-24 19:28 (UTC) - Expand

zerotohiro - 2017-08-24 21:53 (UTC) - Expand