Okay, Kitanna's vote really confuses me. A sensible vote for both a wolf and an innocent would be somebody already mentioned, ie Gil or Holby. What do we make of this?
Quote:
|
Do my eyes deceive me entirely? Are we actually plotting out a bandwagon approach? Do you people realize that with bandwagoning as the accepted option, that nobody's vote can seriously be taken as hard evidence? If we all vote the same, wolves can hide. Or was that your plan, Holby?
|
I'm in charge of the bandwaggoning, Fea. We
have to organise this. No village has ever had to deal with four wolves before. If the wolves band together in their votes, which is so obviously a bad ida that we could miss it, we'd have four votes for an innocent. That could easily sway the rest of the villagers.
By planning out who we want to vote for and who we think is guilty, we can reach a compromise. This person would be who the majority of people have on their suspect list, if not somebody on the top of everybody's list.
This then means that the wolves cannot influence the vote as much. People don't see "Four votes for person X, he must be guilty" and then get tempted to join in. It also means, if the villagers are striking near to the mark, the wolves cannot use the tactic of accusing one of their fellows (though not voting for them). If somebody is second or third on everybody's list, it is safer to lynch them. A wolf cannot accuse a fellow wolf because then this person's name goes on the list.
I'm not sure how much sense I'm making, but the point is, the idea works. Or should do.