View Single Post
Old 06-16-2005, 12:22 PM   #424
the phantom
Beloved Shadow
 
the phantom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Stadium
Posts: 5,971
the phantom is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.the phantom is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.the phantom is wading through snowdrifts on Redhorn.
Send a message via MSN to the phantom
Eye

Quote:
your defensiveness in response to the accusations made against you
I entirely reject the notion that defensiveness is suspicious. If you are a common villager then the only thing you know for sure is that you are innocent, therefore when there is no reason for people to lynch you, you should be extremely adamant about it.

Certainly more adamant than you are about who is a wolf, since you obviously don't know who is, where as you do know you are innocent.

Surely that makes sense?

Especially in my case, where (as I explain in my review) I had no concrete evidence against me. I would be a fool not to scream it out.
Quote:
I don't regret using that strategy and I still think it is a good one
Yes, it was a perfect strategy. If you don't say anything then logically there will never be more evidence to lynch you than to lynch someone else. As a matter of fact, if all our lynchings had to be based on some sort of evidence (votes or statements), then the perfect strategy would be not to post at all.

But that's a bit silly and it is why my friends and I play with a non-participation rule.
Quote:
What's going to happen if a future pack of wolves decide for all to be 'loud', will there be a 'limited number of posts' rule?
I doubt it. This game is all about finding wolves based upon who people have been implicating, defending, and voting for, therefore it is unlikely anyone would ever object to people being extremely forthcoming and forceful with their thoughts because it clearly defines their position. The purpose of a non-participation rule is to ensure that everyone takes some sort of position. After all, we are supposed to be making our accusation based upon the positions of others. So, there will probably never be a rule against having a very clear position. Only having no position is a significant obstacle.

That is why I suggested killing all of you on day two. I saw the lack of information coming from the quiet ones as a large obstacle, whether you were guilty or not. But, as I said on my review, there was no way I could possibly orchestrate a mass lynching, so it didn't matter what I wanted to do.
__________________
the phantom has posted.
This thread is now important.
the phantom is offline   Reply With Quote