Okay just a few short points from the last posts as I've just read them. Then hopefully something more substantial...
It seems we have a new word in our ww-vocabulary - and there is use for it to be true! The latest mantra I find quite odd is this "those latest votes to
Shasta look the most suspicious, don't they?"
We all I think share the amazement looking at the 7-vote tally for
Shasta - and that it screams wolf (although let's not totally blind our eyes to the possibility that the wolves just sat back and enjoyed the events...). But by the time myself and
Greenie were voting (we x'd our votes) there was little to choose from.
So if we want to look for wolvish hands steering the wagon we're already late looking at those last votes (when I voted
Shasta had 5,
Lottie & Pitchie 1 each) - the wagon was already out of control.
Just based on "wagonery", I'd say the following are the ones to build it...
Glirdy (3rd vote)
Skip (4th vote)
Pitch (5th vote)
Whatever the alignment of each and everyone of them, here anyway is our wagon.
Lottie started,
Inzil made the second (in situation 1-1-1), I'm not saying they are innocents because they were not the actual wagon-builders (well, we can discuss whether giving the second vote is wagoning).
Greenie & myself closed it in a situation where it really didn't make a difference anymore.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ozban
In the end Eönwë was only one of us that defended Shasta. For that he has my trust. As much as is possible in this game.
|
You still have some things to learn - and you have time. But really.
Eönwë's last post was rather horribly suspicious than trustworthy. Don't let the hindsight you have now mix with what you think - and remember, the wolves knew all the time we were lynching an innocent - so they could afford playing the "noble" or "moral highground" who'd be proven right in retrospect - and thus look so shiny in their white armour without any blood on their shirts.
Talking of which:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Boro of me
insistance to look at those he thinks chose the "moral high ground" to not vote for Shasta just looks straight up cobblery
|
Of course we should look at the
Shasta voters - we have a dead seer here so of course we have to. It would be the most stupid thing not to. I mean it should go without saying we look closely at such wagons. *enough?*
I have only said we should not forget the others or give them a free pass. I could bet quite a lot at least one wolf markedly did not vote for
Shasta. And I might also guess that that person would have made some noise about it (I haven't checked that, but will).
Anyway, back to bussiness now. I raised my eyebrow quite a few times earlier toDay while reading the thread. I'll get back to those issues.
EDIT: bah,
Ozban seems to have gone - just as he'd need to read something...