[Boromir88]

Well, I see a Zilalysis was already...dun.

I won't go linking and quoting him all over again, especially since I think Nerwen's analysis is true (and in general after reading today's posts, I feel good about Nerwen and Shasta. (nice to have you here finally )).

I'm from the "kill the seer right away" school of villainy...but that's also based on I'm always trying to stay upfront and loud. And even if the seer isn't hitting baddies, the more dreams the more information works against the wolves no doubt.

Although, over the years, I've also seen the folks who are quiet, lay low, and are great at avoiding eyes don't always have the seer as "priority number 1" for the first kill. If say their list of possible seers none are drawing attention to their mates, or if they think whoever the seer, caught the eye of the ranger too and thus would be protected, then the sorcerers would much rather go to get their first kill instead.

Inzil seems to fit this...no one was mentioning as a suspect, he was active, and with others throwing around more obvious gifted vibes, they thought Inzil wasn't going to be protected.

I agree with Nerwen it doesn't look like a frame of Lottie or anyone that Zil was suspecting yesterday. Her reasons why are sound.

My bad feelings on Holby are pretty much based on her post #33:

how 'bout voting for these confusing debaters of the "rule of three"-too bad we cant "lynch of three"

It might have been a jest and maybe an innocent would think "hey three evil sorcerers, too bad we can't lynch all three." But it doesn't come off that way...it comes off as "let's vote this group of people (those debating the rule of three) and too bad they all couldn't be lynched...which comes off...bad for Holby.

Lottie it's not any sinister looking quotes like with Holby, but several textbook looking sorcery. Kath's post #54:

Refusal to make a statement alert! But actually I more wanted to point this out to show that Lottie said she thought any squabble here would not be wolf on wolf - just so we remember it in later Days.

I thought this looked off for Kath, because I didn't think Lottie was refusing to make a statement...I mean I followed Lottie as saying she thought for the time being Legate and Lommy's argument were two innocents.

Although, I don't think I read Kath's statement clearly at first, because I overlooked the Kath just so we would remember it "in later Days." Well, Legate was innocent, so Lottie was right it wasn't wolf-on-wolf but these sort of statements where someone acts as the objective observer outside of the argument (Lottie in this case, but I've done it too).

No matter the true roles of the two arguers (2 innocents, 1 wolf 1 innocent, wolf-on-wolf) it makes Lottie look objective and reasonable. "Alright folks let's not get distracted by this, because it's probably just two innocents in a silly curfluffle." Or it's a a small defense/cover for one of Lottie's mates (Lommy). Since it turns out Legate is innocent, more than likely the matter of Lommy's role would be dropped completely.

But again, no matter Lommy's guilt/innocent it makes Lottie look like an objective observer who wasn't part of the argument...and that "I'm inclined they're both innocent" is 1 suspicious mark against Lottie.

Another is in the voting yesterday, I think it was Shasta today who said Lottie seemed almost thankful to have her choices limitted down out the end...which doesn't look innocent. You probably can't tell with my posts, but I was sitting there for the longest time debating in my head whether I had enough bad feeling to put Kath up in a tie, or would it be better to vote Cop/Legate when I wasn't as suspicious and I'm wary of DL wagons...or completely do a copout and vote for McCaber. No one ever makes Day 1 voting easy, but I agree with Shasta, Lottie seemed calm by it all. (Lottie's vote post)

So we have a triple tie between Cop, Kath, and Legate, with no clarifying rules on tie-breakers? Well then.

++Kath

I find her far more suspicious than either Cop or Legate.

And I've got to be heading out now...so it's going to be:

++Lottie

Edit: crossed with Kath, bolding names