[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Glirdan

I do not trust you and until some proof comes out saying that you are innocent, I shall always distrust you.

The feeling is mutual, my woody friend. But we have moved on from the “in-character” banter. I have no reason at the moment to suspect you any more or any less than most of the others present. Although it has to be said that your point about Valier was rather weak.

Originally Posted by JennyHallu

SPM: I envy him his time to write long posts. However, I don't really feel that he's living up to his reputation at this point.

Please, be gentle with me. I'm a Werewolf Junior virgin …

Anyway, I have reviewed the Day, but have little to add to what I said earlier.

I do feel that I owe our Halfling Chubb Fuddler an apology. On reflection, I see that Lalaith has contributed more than I gave her credit for earlier, and with far less verbosity than I. Mostly sensible and constructive. A little thin on the probing and prodding of other villagers, which I still think is the best Day 1 approach, but everyone‘s different I suppose. Certainly, nothing to cause major alarm at the moment.

Originally Posted by Sleepy Ranger

H'llo ladies and gentlemen, you all know me as Sleepy Ranger, I've never been anything significant in your community seeing how I've always stuck to myself but now... aye, now it seems you need all the help you can get and I'm here to offer all that I can.

A curious offer from one who has done little to aid the cause so far. He has attracted some criticism for his declared intention to vote randomly. Like others, I dislike random votes. And, while I believe it is a standard approach for Sleepy, the same points that I made about Nilp apply (interesting then that he voted for Nilp). For now, as with Nilp, I am prepared to tolerate his lack of constructive contribution. I hope to see more from him in the future, though.

My main suspicions remain with Mithalwen at the moment. Indeed, my review has heightened them. She berated me for accusing her on the basis of her referring to the Hawk and Nightingale being “in league”. In fact, I said:

Originally Posted by me

That's a strange way of putting it. Referring to them being "in league" makes it sound slightly sinister, whereas this is very much to our advantage. Still, I s'pose a Duck would have chosen her words more carefully ...

Not really an accusation. More a thought, really - one which I pretty much dismissed myself. And yet she reacted quite strongly to it:

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

But you see I know I am innocent so the fact that 2 people who said (in posts 12 and 16) that we should make serious efforts to find the ducks find me suspicious for a fine semantic distinction and my habitually excessive punctuation creep me out.

As I said earlier, she‘s coming across to me as jumpy. Both to my musing about her use of the word “league” and spawn’s comment about her exclamation marks. Neither were serious comments (mine was certainly not and I doubt that spawn’s was) and yet Mithalwen’s reaction was perhaps telling. Roa thinks she’s too jumpy for a Duck. I beg to differ.

For that reason, and because she seems deliberately to have tried constructing spurious cases against spawn and I, I feel justified in voting for her. I know that I’m not a Duck and I have no reason at the moment to think spawn is one. Mith may be a valuable ally, if innocent. But she is also a fearsome opponent if guilty. And, right now, she’s looking decidedly guilty to me. So …

++ MITHALWEN

I am quite aware that my vote is widening yet further a field that is already well spread. But that may be no bad thing. And I am not inclined to consider saving Nilp or Sleepy (and would not be even were I not suspicious of them myself). If they get lynched, it’s their own silly fault for random/suicidal voting.

And that’s me done for the Day. I’m off to my nice cosy hovel for a good night’s rest. G’night all.