Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lalaith
Another thing: I have, like a lot of people, been thinking about wolf-on-wolf voting, and with two specific questions in mind:
1. Does Legate's first vote for Hui mean that I was wrong to suspect him yesterDay?
2. Does Hui's 3rd vote for Mac point to his (Mac's) innocence?
Another thing then crossed my mind. Would the fact that a dead wolf ensures that the baddie vote now dominates the QT, make wolves less reluctant to lynch each other? After all, this means the packmate can continue to be useful and push their agenda elsewhere...
|
My two cents: 1. Likely yes. 2. Likely no (
Hui had laid the grounds for voting
Mac earlier, and it might have looked weird to back out of it. Besides, their vote was also self-preservation.) "3". I don't think so. The qt has just one vote. One (publicly known!) wolf vote is not much of a consolation prize for a dead fellow, I'd say.
I did not like the
Kit discussion yesterDay and I think everyone involved in it is low key stupid (including
Legate who said like five times "please shut up about
Kit" which is, paradoxically, a very loud way to address the situation).
But really, can we tell if there were wolves involved or if it was just innocents who didn't necessairly think things through? I don't think the
Kitscussion is more informative than the
Huinelynch - which makes me a little wary of anyone who chooses to pay attention to it primarily (looking at
Kath here).