[Aiwendil]

The Saucepan Man wrote:

I will be keeping an eye on those who seem to be encouraging this talk of Seers. *Glares at littlemanpoet and Aiwendil*

That said, his comments did also prompt all this Seer talk, which I don’t like.

And what harm, I ask thee, has "all this Seer talk" done? It seems to me that it's in the best interest of the village for us to be speak freely regarding strategy. Wolves thrive on secrecy. I trust that the Seers are intelligent enough to decide for themselves how to act, and that they will take advice from fellow villagers only when it seems suitable to them.

Well, enough about that. In general, though, I'm pleased to see that the Day 1 discussion has been largely one concerning strategy rather than a parade of random accusations.

My thoughts turn now toward my vote. In spite of the (I think) fairly productive discussion so far, it's still Day 1 and we have very little to go on. No one so far has struck me as particularly wolvish; in all likelihood (alas!) my vote will fall upon an innocent. But that's no reason to make it random; I shall at the least endeavour to make a (slightly) educated guess.

Of all the villagers, the one that seems to me to have been the most helpful so far is littlemanpoet. I am inclined, for the moment, to think him innocent. If he's a wolf, then he's one most adept at playing the "helpful thinker" role.

Boromir88 and SPM both seem to be helpful as well. At this early stage, I certainly wouldn't go so far as to call either of them "likely innocent". But it seems to me that neither should be lynched on the first Day.

Glirdan worries me slightly. He calls for the lynching of quiet villagers and then votes for Gil-Galad. Now, I can see how an innocent villager could easily do both of those things. But the vote for Gil-Galad seems a very "safe" move for a wolf.

tar-ancalime is another one I have my eye on. Perhaps I'm reading too much into her posts, but it looks to me like she's eager to find excuses to bring suspicion upon people - first with her proposed moratorium on Seer talk (suggesting perhaps that anyone who talks about the Seers is to be suspected) and then with her statement that Spawn's summary "rubs me the wrong way". She has backed off of both of these, declaring that her moratorium was not intended to be a wolf-test and that Spawn's summary is not suspicious. Could be a wolf testing various approaches and backing off when they seem not to be working.

I realize I am grasping at straws here, but that's as it must be. Again, neither Glirdan nor tar strikes me as "likely a wolf". But based on the rather meager evidence we have so far, I am leaning toward voting for one of them .