Werewolf Four and Thirty: Bloodbath in the Anduin Vale

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

never is a wolf going to appear unhelpful

Never say never, dear. And never forget who you play with. There are a half dozen on this moot list whose potential for 'never' isn't something I'll assume about.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Here's one more supporter of "lynch someone you can't form a picture about because of his/her constant absence if you don't have a (good) reason to lynch a louder person/ a contributor"-tactics.

I agree. If within a couple days, you still have no clue who a certain player is, I think you should have no real reservations about mercilessly martyring them to the cause. In a game with evidence based entirely on language, people who shirk in their ability to use it are a waste of time and energy. In chess, you let the pawns go first.

Originally Posted by TGWBS

Yes, I agree, let's lynch all those quiet ones. Starting with that there Feanor *points*. Why does she say nothing? Why is she painting us?

Aww, I missed you too, darling. Would you like to be painted in almost-ripe-banana green? Or would you prefer blue jay blue? I'm a happy impressionist, so you might not recognize yourself by the time I'm done, but if you're lucky, I won't paint you with fangs. Give me reason to, mind you, and I'll paint a very pretty picture of you savaging the moot. I'm withholding opinion on this matter for a little while.

Originally Posted by The Sixth Wizard

Well, we know Fea has played WereWolf before, so perhaps she is just laying low deliberately... But that was a bit jumpy Shorty. We have to use SOME strategy with quiet peeps, don't we? I don't know what kind of strategy, but something.

As I'd already mentioned, I spent yesterday moving from school to home for the summer. And while I'd happily lay low deliberately, yesterday wasn't intentional. Look me up if I seem ridiculously unhelpful later on.

Originally Posted by Aganzir

I guess Fea said she's moving toDay or something, so maybe she isn't laying low deliberately.

Ooh! Somebody beat me to it. It's nice seeing people remember my words. Thanks, Aganzir.

On a side note, if you haven't realized it, I'm writing this post in chronological unedited order as I read what I've missed. So if anything is redundant or if I change my mind, it's for that reason.

Originally Posted by Tiggy

Ah. So she did. Never mind... I will try to get her lynched tomorrow instead.

My thanks for your generosity.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

It is a bit routine to have "Lynch Boromir" as the default setting?

As a rule, I've noticed that it's routine to have "Lynch ____" as default, wherein the person whose sneakiness you most respect gets to fill in the blank. If the phantom was playing, I'd campaign for his death first day because he can't be trusted. Savvy?

In this game, the list of people I have no natural trust for (based experiencially) are:

Mormegil
Nogrod
Boromir88
Kath

And myself, but I don't count.

They would fit into a routine lynch campaign even if only for the reason that I know from watching them that their seeming is often at odds with their being. Knowing they could fool you if they wanted to doesn't make for restful moot-nights.

Still, as of right now, I have no real suspicion of any of them.

TBC--

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Fresh Snow:
Nogrod
Boromir88
Thinlómien
Legate of Amon Lanc
Kath
the guy who be short
Rune Son of Bjarne

Blood-stained:
Mormegil (perpetually so, said with love)
Mithalwen (because I say so, also with love)

Shrug-worthy:
Gil-Galad
Shastanis Althreduin
Aganzir
Rikae
Durelin
Volo
Meneltarmacil
The Sixth Wizard
Isabellkya

++XYZZY

Because I have nobody better to vote for at the moment.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Interesting I too have no trust for Mormegil . . .

Anyways I see that a small case is building up around Menel and if it continues I would not be suprised to see him lynched soon. I however will not join the cause just yet as I have a history of finding Menel suspiciouse, advocating his death, only to find him innocent. Of course this could be the time he is guilty, but just for now I shall not be voting for him.

I could actually say the same thing about Boro, i always find him a bit suspicouse. The main difference is that sometimes I am right and he is furry.

Anyways I will have to vote soon and it is going to be a pretty random vote as I have noticed anything worthy of a vote yet.

[the guy who be short]

Originally Posted by Legate

I think there's been quite a lot of speculation about "quiet ones" and "not quiet ones". Though I have experience from very recent past that indeed these were the quiet ones who were a threat, I will be careful about not getting into the other extreme, that is, starting bloodthirstingly killing all who say nothing or a little. It is true however, that in later time of the game, I will be for lynching people like this, because you'd say they had enough time to speak and they didn't. I mean (as someone already said here before) that on the first Days, I'll back from doing something like that (some people might not even get much online, e.g. Fea today). However, as three or four days pass, I'd also focus on the silent ones, because if they wanted, they could speak. I think it was Rune who already mentioned it here somewhere and I think it's a good opinion.

Now then... What you're saying seems to be the opposite of what ole Rune said. He said kill the quiet now, because it may be too late when we get in a few days. This means we can kill the loud people later on. I like this idea. You, on the other hand, advocate killing the quiet later on, which I think is a bit of a bad idea. Later on, we'll still have very little idea about the quiet people, but we'll have formed strong opinions about the loud. We would therefore probably end up, as ever, lynching the loud.

Not accusing you, just pointing this out.

And in the vein of killing the quiet,

++DURELIN

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by the guy who be short

Now then... What you're saying seems to be the opposite of what ole Rune said. He said kill the quiet now, because it may be too late when we get in a few days. This means we can kill the loud people later on. I like this idea. You, on the other hand, advocate killing the quiet later on, which I think is a bit of a bad idea. Later on, we'll still have very little idea about the quiet people, but we'll have formed strong opinions about the loud. We would therefore probably end up, as ever, lynching the loud.

Ah-ha! Indeed, I must've misread it somehow. Okay, in that case I'm opposing to it. Though I must say, as I read it now, it's a good idea in the fact that if we lynch someone quiet early, we'll be "right" to do it. I can't forget that I said something very similar in my first game when I was a wolf (I said: "lynching a silent innocent is ok because he is worth nothing for the village"), however, interesting thing is that all the village was after me because of saying it (well, those who remember it know it wasn't much of a big case, but what I want to say is that it created a wave of disagreement. Now here there are several people saying basically the same, and everyone thinks it okay? Just meditating on this, because, in fact, I agree with that - I was honest in this opinion even back then: But why now, with many people being the same, no one protests vehemently against it, as they did before?)
Now back to the topic - I think, actually, lynching quiet ones is a good thing to do if you have no better suspect. Especially at the beginning, when the voting is (let's confess it) quite random. Basically said (and once again, it sounds quite cruel): "Even if we lynch an innocent, it isn't such a loss, it's his fault, he should have been more vocal." Your thoughts are logical on this. But how comes suddenly everyone thinks it is a good idea and no one protests? If it were such a great idea, why didn't everyone do it in the games before? And, mainly, note that from my experience before, I was a Wolf when I adviced that. Why I said it then? Because all the wolves were vocal. And with players we have this time ( ) I wouldn't wonder if all the wolves were vocal. And, if you once start this strategy (of voting out quiet ones), the wolves, unless they are completely stupid, will speak up. Of course it will force them to participate more, thus, be more vulnerable to be caught lying or something like that. But that wouldn't compare with killing quiet innocents, who may even be Gifted. And the biggest problem I see with this is, as I said in my earlier post, that we might accidentally lynch a quiet innocent, who had the bad luck not to get to the computer on Day 1, for whatever reason; or even didn't have chance to speak up yet because his timing is bad, and some people who have to leave their computers already have to vote now, and just because he arrives five minutes after them they classify him as "non-posting" and vote him. If anything, I'd leave this strategy on Day 1 out. It's in nothing better than voting for a vocal player because he seems fishy to you based on several Day 1 posts.
EDIT: x-ed with Volo&Rune