Quote:
|
If you'll remember, Firefoot, Gil wasn't a known innocent at the time.
|
I know, I'm writing with my 20/20 hindsight.
At least, some of it is 20/20. Seriously, though, anytime I say "known innocent" or "proven innocent," it is on what we know currently. I think you already understood that, though.
Quote:
|
you're so darned organized
|
Heh, I'm good at making lists but it doesn't organize my mind very well...
Quote:
|
He's not to be taken lightly. Probably guilty
|
I agree with Morm that TGWBS is not to be taken lightly; I, however, am leaning towards his innocence.
Quote:
|
She's hard to read with being so loud and all however I feel that if she were a wolf she'd be a bit less vocal
|
Now here's what would be suspicious: a quiet Fea. No, no, the best way for a wolf to act is how they normally act. While I am leaning towards Fea's innocence, it's not because she's not being quiet(er).
Concerning quiet vs. loud: wolves can come from either end of the spectrum. Our only real "quiet ones" are Oro (3 posts) and Nilp (1 post). What we really need to look at, though, is what people are saying. If Nilp's 1 post was really informative and comprehensive, I would look less at him. (I'm not exactly suspicious of him, but my theory of this is "Guilty until convinced otherwise."
) So, looking at the quality of people's posting:
There is a lack of substance in the posts of Gil-Galad and Nilp.
There is middling substance in the posts of Oro, Holbytlass, Kitanna, and Kath.
There is good substance in the posts of Fea, TGWBS, Morm, and Durelin (and I'll throw myself in here).
Definitions (so there is no confusion):
Lack of substance - Very few or no suspicions cast (esp. toDay); no real logical thinking.
Middling substance - These people give voice to suspicions, though not always with reasons. Some commenting on what has happened, though not always what they think of it.
Good substance - Give voice to suspicions and provide at least some back up. Make logical comments about what is going on and what they think about it. Generally provide lists and/or explanations.
My guess is that 2 or 3 of our wolves will come from the first two categories, but we probably have at least one wolf in the last category.