[Aganzir]

On day 1 Nerwen noted down Nog's vote for Ilya (feels out of character from someone who usually favours known players) and mine for Brinn (wondering what I meant by calling her generally trustworthy). I find Nog's vote understandable in terms of wanting to try new people but I can also understand why Nerwen felt the need to point it out. As for my vote, if someone else had used the same reasons, I would probably have asked as well what they meant by generally trustworthy.

She said the business between Legate, phantom and Boro seemed a bit coreographed (especially phantom & Legate's reversing their opinions of each other), as did the one between phantom, Brinn and Shasta, but I failed to see anything that strange between them. On the other hand, at least wolf-Nerwen is known for grouping up people.
She also found it weird how I became a rep despite posting so little (with which I can agree).
Nerwen thought Gil's confusion looked pretty genuine. I did, too.

Then on to day 2. She speculated a bit about Cab's death - no seer hints so it looks like a mere no trace kill, but on the other hand, the lack of substance could have been used against him later, given his reputation as a sneaky wolf.

She accused Ilya, half-jokingly, because she didn't like the following "say-nothing paragraph":

Originally Posted by Ilya

Anyone about whom general opinions have been form would be advantageous to keep around. And I think given the events of Day 1, reputation, or lack thereof, played into the voting of the reps but not into the lynch votes. Reps turned on constituents, and some constituents turned on their reps. I need to go reread, uhm, everything. But Anna Karenina takes precedent tonight, so I probably won't be around until after class tomorrow, around 4ish.

I think I'm a bit more on Nerwen's side on this one as well. However, it wasn't the most suspicious thing Ilya had said by then, so I don't know why it was just that that caught Nerwen's eye.

Phantom claimed that wolves need to get rid of the seer as fast as possible, but Nerwen replied that it's quite improbable no one would have looked like a seer to the wolves even on day 1, so they didn't go after Cab assuming he was the seer. She asked if the wolves might have thought he was the ranger, trying to lay low. Well Cab's pretty much always lying low, so I don't find it a valid reason for the wolves to assume he had any special role.
Also, how would it have been easy for them to turn up suspicion on Cab just because he's a silent player (and therefore also a silent wolf)?

Both Ilya and Brinn have Nerwen feel a bit uneasy because of their reactions to Cab's death, ie speculating why he was killed (no traces) after it was I guess more or less agreed that he was a no trace kill - she called it deliberate misdirected answering. The question was who would benefit from such a safe kill.
Nerwen had much speculation about Cab's death but I don't think she came up with any names (I might be wrong here - I already closed the tabs I had her previous posts opened in). So therefore her speculations are pretty empty. She also started suspecting Ilya and Brinn a bit because of their speculations.

Then morm started suspecting Nerwen because of her agreeing with (parroting, in morm's words) phantom now that he was generally considered pretty innocent, and because of that ranger episode. Nerwen replied she didn't parrot phantom but agreed with him, and told she really thought there was a ranger. Here's the parroting post morm was talking about. I don't think Nerwen's parroting him there, really. To me it looks more like agreeing and taking the thinking process further, with the quote serving as a topic under which the chain of thought goes, if you understand what I mean. I think that indicates neither guilt nor innocence. Out of curiosity, Nerwen, why did you call morm predictable? Is there an old grudge I'm not aware of?
However this quote made me feel uneasy.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I am quite insulted that you think I'd try an idiotic wolf-cub ploy like pretending not to know the rules.

Because I think her attack is too fierce given the accusation. Okay, I don't really think Nerwen would pretend not to know the rules. If she's a wolf, the wolves hadn't talked about a ranger (or the lack of it), so she had no reason to think there's none, and in every case I buy her explanation. It's just her defense that bothers me... It's really too strong. Although I can agree morm was a bit provocative when saying Nerwen could try to play it ignorant once that Gil had succeeded in it, too.
But it still looks too fierce.

Nerwen voted Lommy for rep because she thought she's likely innocent and has usually good judgement (ha! What do you mean by usually good judgement?), and because she'd like to see a change of government.

She agreed with Greenie that it makes little sense to give the third vote for someone one doesn't trust (with which I can agree), and promised to go through Nog & Boro's posts if she has time, which she did.
Nothing in their posts jumped out to her and at first they had very little interaction with each other, but she pointed out that packmates might want to do that. She concluded, though, that their quarrel today looked pretty genuine, and Boro made some good points against Nog (which is why Nog's vote for Boro is even more puzzling). She didn't find any good evidence of a link between them.

Okay, that's it.
I think Nerwen doesn't look very suspicious apart from her reaction to morm, which could be that of an innocent as well. So I'm pretty much at a loss now, because at the same time I know she's capable of all sorts of nasty things and I just wouldn't want to stop suspecting her like this, just to be on the safe side.
I'll probably read through this later and see if my mind is any clearer.

edit: xed since my last post