Tol-in-Gaurhoth IV (The Saga, erm, Still Continues...)

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

And you should talk, tp, when your best plan is knowingly slaughtering innocents? Forgive me when I laugh at you.
Our gifted villagers are a perk, nothing more. They are just as expendable as anyone else. So what if the Seer dies? The odds are against us that we'll even know who it is until it's too late. And can the Ranger protect for more than one night in a row? If we kill the Ranger? Then everybody's chances of night time survival are still equal. Our Shirriffs are helpful only to each other, and even that is slim, as neither has anything to go on but hunches. Our Hunter is who we should be most worried about slaying, because he or she takes someone to the grave beside him/her, but even that isn't that bad, because the Hunter has what, a 17.6% chance of picking who also dies accurately?

Though we may mourn the loss of our gifted members, their deaths will not be as severely detrimental as intentionally killing people that we know aren't werewolves! While I can appreciate your idea, tp, I cannot condone it, and I will not. I want everyone listening to know that, should you decide to offer up evening sacrifices, I am whole-heartedly against it. I see it only as saying "Well, we know for certain that you are innocent, so we'll kill you, instead of the sketchy looking guy over there." Completely pointless.

[Kath]

But surely this plan makes some sense for today as so far we have no 'sketchy looking characters', well with the possible exception of Eomer and his little Freudian (?) slip there. Since we have nothing upon which to base our votes and guesses one innocent and less important villager's death will mean we still have the Seer, the Rangers and the Shirrifs, the latter of which we surely need both of or they become useless.

[littlemanpoet]

Pardon my penchant, phantom I can't help it.
Nor can you if you'll let me tell it.
And Eomer, maybe you just just mistaked,
but maybe ol' Sir Freud's not so baked.
Don't think I didn't notice you try
to cast my suspicion as fooler-eye.

And werewolves can let their guard down and make vital mistakes.

And did you make one?
Hmm? Gotta won-
der, you rapscallient
excuse for an innocent!

And I gotta say
that Peredhil Féa
is getting more convincing
with each passing posting.

[Kath]

But Eomer, with no evidence to speak of whatsoever except for a hidden message from the Seer somewhere around you have to use any evidence available to you whether hard or soft.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

I am still unclear as to what advantage we gain from having the seer around. Besides the novelty, of course.

Nice poem LMP, living up to you're name.

Good observation lmp, but isn't the aim of the game to find werewolves and not make me look like an idiot?

Nicely put. The Downs is a friendly sight where we should all try to be nice to each other. Even if we are about to get eaten by the W-Ws.

[the phantom]

Tell me, what was the purpose of this?

What, my poem post? I just couldn't resist.

As for your hostility towards Fea: it's completely justified.

Unfortunately, she always acts like this, so who knows if there is an actual reason for it?

And I gotta say
that Peredhil Féa
is getting more convincing
with each passing posting.

I sincerely hope you aren't saying that her arguments are convincing in some way other than convincing you that she is off her rocker.

[the phantom]

How is it that I am making myself look guilty by trying to make people see that killing off people that we know are innocent will not help us in the long run?

You are obviously missing the entire point of the plan. The entire point of the plan is to help the village "in the long run". My plan accepts that innocents will die early and attempts to at least preserve our gifted villagers. That is most definitely helpful in the long run.

Isn't it better to take a chance and maybe kill a werewolf, instead of give up all hope at this stage of the proceedings and immediately start killing off the good guys?

NO!!!

Sheesh. I've already demonstrated the statistical disadvantage of attempting to randomly select a wolf. I think you need to go back and read my first few posts again.

The idea is that we don't want innocent people to die!

BUT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ANYWAY AT THE BEGINNING!!! The most we can do is pick which innocent dies.

What is so difficult to understand about this???

You either have poor math and reasoning skills, or you are a foolish wolf.

Where is the best place to hide? Out in the open.

True, and who has been the most openly guilty so far? You!

What in the world has happened when logic means killing innocent people while werewolves run free?

Your arguments have already demonstrated your weak grip on things that involve logic, so I don't think you should be trying to comment on logic (or lack thereof) in any situation.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I would like to point out that the werewolves are probably laughing heartily at this bicker.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

I would like to point out that the werewolves are probably laughing heartily at this bicker.

Unless one of the bickering duo is a werewolf. *glares at the phantom*

Okay... you've got to listen to me. I would rather try to catch a werewolf and screw up, than freely give up the chance to even try.

I don't care if an "innocent" steps forward to die. I will not be voting for whoever that person is. I'll take my chances with luck and try to kill somebody that actually is supposed to die.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Why have I accused Anguirel and Lalaith?

Hmm.....

As this appears so blindingly obvious to me, I'm not going to answer you directly, at least not for a while. I am going to wait until every other person speaks (or at least most other people).

For fear of wasting my time.

You wouldn't grasp at such feeble straws for no reason, now would you Miss Fea? This is precisely the fallacious reasoning I talked of earlier. From my perspective, you are probably innocent: don't ruin that by taking the bait meant for werewolves.

[the phantom]

I am still unclear as to what advantage we gain from having the seer around.

You've got to be kidding.

I'm not even going to answer that, Hookbill. Somebody else do it.

Something else that's occured to me with this plan is that once someone volunteers, they've effectively given the biggest "Look - I'm an innocent" sign that they could possibly put forward. I don't know about the rest of the village, but I would be very hesitant to lynch a volunteer. And that could provide cover for the wolves if they see it as a way to declare innocence and also see a low probability of the rest of the town taking up the offer.

Excellent observations.

That is why, if people like the plan, we must follow through on it. If the wolves think "They won't really do it once we step forward" then they will- and people will think it makes them innocent.

Furthermore, if we follow through on lynching volunteers, an innocent does volunteer every day, and then is lynched every day, it just depletes the population of villagers and keeps us from lynching a real wolf.

We would only do it the first two days.

Féa's saying that gifted villagers are expendable doesn't quite sit well with me.

No kidding.

[littlemanpoet]

Obviously honest, you say.
Okay,
that may be.
We'll see.

Yes phantom's plan has more merit
if we limit it
to two days
but hey
don't look at me
to offer to all of thee
myself to volunteer.
It's clear
to me of course that I'm no wolf
but only in the pudding is there proof.
All right, it's supper time
I'm making sure to get mine.

[littlemanpoet]

Off her rocker? Well, not exactly.
You're both loudmouths, matter of factly.
Maybe you're both werewolves and creating this fuss
to distract the rest of us
to throw us off the (hint hint) scent.
Or maybe you're both innocent.
Who's to say?
Who knows how you'll play?
One thing's sure,
it's that Eomer
made a word slip
which may be a mere blip
or it may be evidence
of his malfeasance (sp?).

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I now congratulate lmp on joining Kath in the 'silly serious' club.

Actually, he's ahead of Kath in the suspicion list. Why would he keep referring to that obviously honest mistake? He's not stupid, so....

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I accidentally said outright that I am a werewolf with a malevolent eye? You rascal lmp!

By mistakes I referred to the trusting of fallacious reasoning. I did not refer to switching my 'her's' and my 'my's' in a tale including 'her' and 'me'.

But I know all about your trickery, o yes! I remember the japes we used to pull in our younger days. Remember that goat we set loose in Evisse's garden? Those were the days....

*ahem*

Anywho, you really haven't lived life yet, if you ain't got no regrets. And I am regretting my lazy use of possessive pronouns....

Why do I think that someone will vote for me on that basis....

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Okay, I'll admit that saying the Seer is expendable is a little hasty of me. Wait... no I won't.

Right now, we have a Seer. He or she knows somebody's identity. Chances are high that he or she knows the identity of somebody that, quite frankly, we don't care about.

So we'll kill an innocent today. The wolves will kill an innocent tonight. There's a chance, however small, that the wolves are going to kill our Seer tonight any how, unless of course he or she comes out and says "Hey everybody, I'm the Seer. Ranger, you need to protect me tonight." In that case, the wolves have the chance of slaughtering the Ranger instead, and then the Seer is up for grabs the next night.

Or the wolves swipe the hunter, and two people die. Or, of course, the wolves swipe one of tp's expendable innocents, and apparently nobody cares, right?

My point is, that, probability for day one aside, your numbers aren't going to help us win the game, because there is the human error quotient. The Seer could be killed tonight, and then you wasted a life for nothing.

Any how, since nobody is going to listen to me about my opinion on tp's colossally stupid kill-plan, here's a brain-teaser.

Neither Anguirel nor Lalaith have posted yet, and yet Eomer's accused them both. Twice. Why, Eomer?

[the phantom]

Chances are high that he or she knows the identity of somebody that, quite frankly, we don't care about.

Wrong.

If the seer is able to identify someone as being innocent, it is extremely valuable if you know how to use the information.

If the number of proven innocents ever equals the number of wolves then the villagers automatically win if they behave correctly.

I don't expect you to see how that works. It's a bit complicated and tough to figure out at first, but it's true.

There's a chance, however small, that the wolves are going to kill our Seer tonight any how, unless of course he or she comes out and says "Hey everybody, I'm the Seer. Ranger, you need to protect me tonight." In that case, the wolves have the chance of slaughtering the Ranger instead, and then the Seer is up for grabs the next night.... The Seer could be killed tonight, and then you wasted a life for nothing.

The chance of the seer or Ranger getting killed during the night will not be affected by who we kill today, so no, the life will not have been wasted.

If they kill the seer then they kill the seer. There's nothing we can do about that.

I'll take my chances with luck

Luck over a more statistically sound plan?

Typical seventeen year old.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

If the number of proven innocents ever equals the number of wolves then the villagers automatically win if they behave correctly.

I don't expect you to see how that works. It's a bit complicated and tough to figure out at first, but it's true.

Just because I don't like your plan doesn't mean that I don't understand it, or that I don't think it has a number of merits. So don't bother with the condescending and infuriating "I don't expect you to understand" and the "typical seventeen year old" stuff.

Clarify this part of it for me: the Seer (or whoever else it is in your head) knows that these three are innocent. How does he or she convey this information to the rest of the innocents without the wolves finding out also?

The chance of the seer or Ranger getting killed during the night will not be affected by who we kill today

Sure it will, math-boy. If we take one innocent out of the pool, then there are less people for the wolves to kill, thereby increasing their chance of randomly selecting someone we want to keep. If you need smaller numbers, here are some.

There are three fish in the pond, a blue fish, a red fish, and an orange fish. The fisherman is guaranteed to catch one. He has a 1:3 chance of catching the blue fish. If we take out the orange fish and leave it on the shore to die or something equally gross, then there are only two fish left. It means that the fisherman now has a 1:2 chance of getting the blue fish. Capiche?

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

*spit* I'm innocent. I'll volunteer.

Volunteer for what, may I ask?

I dunno. "Volunteerin'" sounds mighty fun. *cough*

By de whey, Eomer, thanks for keeping my role alive, pardner. Someone suspicious ain't one if he ain't suspicious, if y'all know wat I mean. *spit*

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Why would Eomer point to one person?

Why two?

Or why any at all?

Why would the phantom suggest such daring, excellent, yet glaringly flawed plan? And why would Fea and Azaelia violently oppose it if nobody would be volunteering anyway?

And Saurreg, who is this FN??

Why ask this questions? Are you trying to point something out, but are too scared to be seen pointing?

Hush, alter-ego. You're not supposed to be here. I'm the only one who joined, remember? I don't see your name on tgwbs's list, don't I?

[Evisse the Blue]

Simple. Neat. And wrong.


Looking back, and if I had brains enough to count correctly, I see that we have 5 against the plan, and 5 basically agreeing with the plan. This tells us...absolutely nothing... Except that everyone is pretty much as confused as I am. Even those that didn't agree see this one major flaw that nobody will volunteer. Oops, wait, someone did volunteer. That means we found our scapegoat, did we? Who better to lynch than the suspicious guy?

Would this plan work if it were not done in the first two days? Could we go back to it in the later stages with the same effect?

What would be the point of that? I understood the only benefit of this plan is that it can be used in the beginning stages when we have not much to be suspicious of. Although, some suspicions are clearly forming, even at this stage *looks at the web of accusations, insults, slips. etc*

Well, I'm off to make the pizza, y'all must be hungry after all this fighting. Except those of you who feasted last night, that is.

[Lalaith]

This is hard. I must be away from the village now, and won't be back until the end of the vote.
I had hoped that by now some votes would have been cast. To be the first to name a lynching victim is a difficult thing, both morally and strategically.

Like Evisse, I am confused by many things. Was Feanor's and phantom's fight indeed a smokescreen, as lmp suggests? On the other hand, why were Eomer and phantom so keen to label our artist crazy? She made mostly good sense to me. And what of the fence-sitters, who backed phantom's plan and whose only objections were pragmatic (no-one volunteering) rather than moral?
Phantom's strategy is based on a risk-adverse principle - killing an innocent as a safeguard because the chances of lynching a gifted villager being too high. Yet his own behaviour has been the opposite of risk-adverse. He has been running the risk - if of course he is himself a non-werewolf - of being identified, rightly or wrongly, by the werewolves as a gifted villager. Of course, our healer is a clever and complicated person, and so contradictory behaviour from him is less suspicious than from someone else. But still....
I will have another cup of coffee before I leave, and mull over what scarce evidence we have so far, and try to pluck up the courage to cast my vote.