Werewolf XXXI: The Unknown Enemies

[Gil-Galad]

Originally Posted by Roa_Aoife

Gil - because while I appreciate his greater activity, the things he's saying are sending up all sorts of red flags- his deliberate pointing out potential gifted, his baseless case against Sixth, (it's not compassion Gil; it's common sense), and lastly, his dropping his suspicion against Lommy and Sixth and going for Mith. Mith is is suspicious, no doubt, but the reasons he uses are fabricated at best

wow... i didn't say i wasn't suspicous of lommy and sixth anymore, i just said that i was confused about the whole Lommy-Roa relationship that has made me thinking...

and now yo uare defending Sixth about being compassionate... sigh... now don't tell me that is not fabricated, i may drop my suspicions of Sixth if somebody shows me a complete post, but for now i'm still wary of Lommy and Roa, i don't like this tag-team againest me one bit...

i say to ye vilalgers, if you join this bandwagon, then i urge you to persecute Roa and Lommy because i don't like being cornered by everyone


in conclusion, i say that Roa's reasons are fruitless at best againest me...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Whatever might have happened here today and yesterday at the end, I went through everything and I realized I have to stand behind my early option. Thinlómien. One other thing emerging here today about her would be the possibility of her and Six being connected. I know they are both early-voters, but we are not in Day 1 anymore. See: Day 1 - Lommy has to leave, votes Glirdan. Six has to leave, votes Glirdan. Day 2 - Lommy has to leave, votes tgwbs. Six shouts about Lommy fanclub, votes tgwbs. Eeek. Something smells here. Though I have said I'll leave thoughts on Six to later then, this is strange.

Mac I was getting a little bit suspicious of because there still seemed to be something slippery on him; particularly I was interested in his case against tgwbs, which I felt to be fabricated. I must say, the main point is because I felt tgwbs innocent and didn't feel it right to accuse him. It crushes with my logic, if they were both innocent, that this case appeared. However, after going through all Mac wrote, I now see him clearer than ever and am prepared to drop him from my suspect list. He seems innocent and logical.

Nogrod I have very strong opinion on: either he is a total wolf who should be lynched rightaway, or he is a very good and intelligent innocent and... yeah, lynching him would be the worst thing to do. I somehow can't put the evidence together this time, I am not as concentrated as I should, or something like that. I am not dropping him, but probably, unless something else happens, I am going to vote for Lommy today. I am saying this in forward, though I am not going to cast my vote now yet in case something happens (so far there was just a tgwbs and Mith bandwaggon forming, and who knows what might happen), but if anyone else thinks we should vote for Lommy, I say straightforward I am for it and I will cast that vote later. I just want to use the advantage of having time till later before the deadline, so I'll cast it later (if we had retractions, I'd have cast it at that point).

EDIT: X-ed with Gil and the last two.

Edit - Ad Mac:
Okay pal, in your last post, you swept off the last suspicions. I drop everything against you - if you are a wolf, then you must have miraculous abilities.

Edit - Ad tgwbs:
Seems the Lommy bandwaggon has started, so I am not alone (cf. above). Will still wait yet, though...

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Roa

One more thing gives me pause though, and while Nogrod was right in suggesting we not use the information learned from last night's events, I can't help but think that a wolvish Nogrod would never let a kill get away.

Originally Posted by Roa

And I'm going shamelessly metagame (use outside knowledge) and vote
++Gil
Because he's the most likely to let a kill slip away.
I know you didn't want us to use that, Nogrod, and that's honorable and admirable, but I can't help having that thought in my head. It seems silly to ignore the common sense of the matter.

Okay. So be it. And now that you mentioned these again I guess the milk is spilled wide enough anyhow. And looking at the brighter side of this: if Menel has some nasty surprises for us in this game maybe it's just fair we can also use some unfair means of getting our wolves... (I remember Lommy once got my ancestor who was a wolf by mod-Glirdy slipping the sex of the wolf in the narration... so this would not be the first time)

So you're absolutely right with the first one. I was there before and after the deadline and would never let a kill slip. If I were a wolf and my mate wouldn't be around near the deadline I'd take action by myself, not bothering to wait for my lazy / unfortunate mate (I'd send a kill to the mod on my own and added that it's subject to change if my mate miraculously reappears from somewhere before the DL, or something like that).

And what you say about Gil is just what I have been thinking myself. That's why I picked him back to my "needs to analyse" list as I wished to be able to read him through and find something else to suspect him for than this "probably the one to be able to miss a kill" -argument...

In fact I'm going to try and do just that now. And take a look at few others as well as I think I need to do some rearranging in my mind about certain people - mainly dropping them from my suspicions if the rereading allows that.

[Mithalwen]

Blimey, clearly I should have read the admin thread at lunchtime!!!!

Rather annoying to be described as stalling when one has made a huge effort to participate even for 20 minutes 4-5 hours earlier than wouldhave been otherwise possible......


Idle wolves ..... does anyone really think for a second that I would have missed a kill? I was online yesterday til nearly the deadline thought I am not sure I posted enough to prove it.

[Macalaure]

Lommy's posts yesterDay have been talked of enough, so here's what she said today. She has very limited time, let's see how she spent it.


First

She comments about people being snappy and edgy, when at the same time we are doing fine. I already said how suspicious I find this.

Her comment about the non-kill is classically lommyish, but does not really further our cause.


Second

She says a cunning and bold wolf might have voted like Six did. Doesn't this imply that a cunning and bold wolf would have voted the way Lommy herself voted, too? Yet she said the things I said about her made her raise an eyebrow (without explanation why). If I'm oversimplifying things, then at least I'm not aware of this.

What has happened to Gil??? I quite like his new self, and would not like voting him right now without strong judgement.

I don't know what this is supposed to mean. Did I miss something? Gil is more outspoken than he used to be (praise Eru!), why is she putting talk about voting him in there?

She's suspicious of tgwbs and will look at him closer.

There's also some good advice for Six and some joking. All nice, but isn't time pressing us?


Third

Brinniel - innocent: agreement here
Gil - again, says she likes his way, but immediately talks about lynching him again, even though she says she doesn't want to. I'm sorry, but this leaves a sneaky impression with me.
Legate - funny, yes, but I have no idea how she got there.
Me - hasty and edgy? I don't know about hasty, but I'm sure I've been more edgy in some past games.
Mith - puts her in the middle zone, but somehow this one feels really sneaky
Nogrod - she made up her mind about Roa's analysis and apparently decided to dismiss it.
Rikae - nothing
Roa - she decided not to like Roa's analysis, that's ok. She still believes Roa to be innocent, that's ok, too.
tgwbs - bad case against her, deliberately misunderstanding Roa, Roa makes good points against him: this is all not inherently suspicious, but, lacking a better word right now, hasty.
Six - innocentish, but unsure: this is interpretable in both ways
Xyzzy - nothing, of course

Her conclusion: tgwbs or me, maybe Mith or Legate


Fourth

She votes tgwbs for his bad case against her. Just because it's not unexpected now, it doesn't mean it's not retaliation.

He seems very edgy/jumpy too.

Yes, he does! But that does not necessarily point towards wolvishness. More often, in fact, it points towards the opposite.



Well, Lommy's posts today do not cry wolf, but also aren't model-innocentish by far. I did not encounter one thing that made me feel more easy about her than before. If she is evil, then her behaviour fits seamlessly. If I had a better suspect today, I would go with that one, but I don't. Unless something strange happens, I will vote Lommy today.

This makes three votes for Lommy now. I'm really interested in seeing what rivaling bandwaggon will appear against Lommy's.


PS: I suggest that those who spill the milk shall have to drink it.

edit: crossed with Brinn

[Mithalwen]

We don't know if we have a ranger though, so if we go a night with out a kill, we cannot assume that a person was protected. Roa

So no kill means that the wolves just decided not to kill anybody? Why not come to the sensible conclusion that no kill = ranger? Why is she trying to make us doubt even this? TGWBS

Maybe we have very cunning wolves rather than idle ones... but Brinniel, that isn't a confession.....

Is it coincidence, TGWBS trying to frame Roa, or Roa bluffing....? I need to go through everything... but if anyone else is inclined ot give their opinion I woul dbe interested.

[Brinniel]

As of now, the official voting count looks like this:

tgwbs: 2
Mithalwen: 1
Gil-Galad: 1
Lommy: 1

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong...

Five votes down, seven to go...

I have to run to class right now, but I will be back around an hour before deadline, which should give me enough time to vote.

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

We don't know if we have a ranger though, so if we go a night with out a kill, we cannot assume that a person was protected. Roa

So no kill means that the wolves just decided not to kill anybody? Why not come to the sensible conclusion that no kill = ranger? Why is she trying to make us doubt even this? TGWBS

It just occurred to me that we might have a Cursed Villager among us, a villager who, when attacked by the wolves, turns into one of them. This would result in a night without a kill, too.

[Brinniel]

Nogrod, you wrote earlier:

I have a suggestion. I hope you agree with it.

So how about we just make a deal that no one discusses the events of the last Night and uses none of the information s/he might have gained, direct or indirect, as evidence or reason to back up any of her/his views in-game?

The other possibility surely is that we exploit all there is, but I think that would not be wise if we wish to maintain something like a fair play here.

Surely everyone is allowed to make her/his deductions of things that have happened outside the game-thread - I have done a lot myself already. But let us try to not use them as arguments in-game and try to find other ways to make our points about suspicions and feeling easier about people?

Okay, Roa has decided to exploit this issue...her vote is not exactly something I agree with, but I'm not going worry about it for the moment.

The thing is, Nogrod seemed so against making arguments and decisions based on what happened last Night. Now that Roa has brought it up, he seems a little too eager to jump on Gil for the same reasons. This makes me a bit uneasy.

So, perhaps we could go on analyzing who the wolf may be based on last Night's events, but I don't think that'll get us anywhere. Alright, maybe some could be more likely to let a kill go than others, but honestly, would any wolf really want that to happen, especially after a Day One lynching of their mate? I think the most likely explanation for what happened is that something came up in RL for at least one of the wolves that was unavoidable and there was a misunderstanding between the two on who was submitting the kill. I'm not sure...but it's not something we will know until the game is over. But I think lynching someone only based on this is very weak.

I still don't understand this bandwagon against Lommy. Perhaps I am being blindly misled, but for now I have to agree with Sixth and say her posts seem fairly honest and trustful to me. I don't know...all this mistrust towards her is rather confusing to me. If she is still alive tomorrow, I suppose I'll start examining her more closely...maybe there is something I'm just not seeing.

On tgwbs, I really have no idea whether he is innocent or not...certainly there are plenty who seem to think the latter. While I don't agree with his suspicions on Lommy and Roa, he doesn't really give off a wolfish vibe for me. As of the moment, I feel rather hesitant to vote for tgwbs.

Okay, this is how I'm seeing things right now:

Most Likely Innocent:
Sixth Wizard

Possibly Innocent:
Lommy
Macalaure
Legate

Unsure:
Roa
tgwbs
xyzzy
Rikae

Slightly Suspicious:
Gil-Galad

Suspicious:
Mithalwen
Nogrod