Werewolf LIII: The Republic

[Brinniel]

phantom, you made eight posts in a row. I mean, really. Talk about flood posting...

About the McCaber kill: Looking at his posts, I'm thinking it's most likely he was chosen as a no trace kill. He doesn't have many posts and the ones he has are short. And within those posts is little substance...he doesn't say much about other players at all.

Originally Posted by Boromir

But first, I'll say, there was not nearly enough talk and suspicions going on yesterday.

As tp noted, the lack of suspicions was mainly due to the fact that it was Day 1. A lot of chatter and few well grounded suspicions is typical Day 1 behaviour simply because on the first Day there's never a whole lot to go off of so early on. I thought there was actually quite a bit of talking for Day 1...though perhaps that was due to the 48 hour time span...

Originally Posted by tp

It just seems so... weird... to actually think about the number of Reps you want. What does that have to do with anything?

I don't understand why thinking about having a goal number of reps is weird...to me it's quite logical. I think like an American under the Electoral College system; if we're going to have people representing us, then I want it to be in equal proportion to the total population. Because going in that direction means a fairer representation of the village. Of course I never said we had to have a set number of reps...in a game where each player has their own agenda, that's simply not possible. I was just sharing my preference. By that first deadline, we ended up having seven reps (1/3 of the village), a number I was happy with. Now if we were to go by the same proportion again toDay, there would be six reps. I'm just using plain logic here. If there's anything weird about it, it's the fact that I'm actually attempting math...

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Is it possible they thought he was the Ranger, trying to lay low?

No, not if the wolves had read the rules. There's no ranger in this game. The only gifted is the seer.

It's really late here, so I'm heading to bed as I'm already lacking enough sleep as it is. Don't expect much activity from me until the later half of the Day (of part one). I might pop in here and there, but I won't be online for a large chunk of time until after 6pm EST.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Brinniel

About the McCaber kill: Looking at his posts, I'm thinking it's most likely he was chosen as a no trace kill. He doesn't have many posts and the ones he has are short. And within those posts is little substance...he doesn't say much about other players at all.

Brinniel, I don't think there can be any doubt he was a no-trace kill (especially since there's no Ranger– I was under the impression there was, for some reason, so thanks for correcting me). My point is that I'm wondering who among us would be likely to have the no-trace kill as a priority.

EDIT: fixed bolding.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Makes Some Sense:

Mormegil: There is a few things I do not agree with in his posts, such as his views on who would make a good Representative. Anyways besides minor things I think it is a very reasonable post he has put together here and a very good analysis of the Representatives votes. . . Or rather the fact that he points out Ilya’s vote as being the safe “look good vote” and that Nogrod’s should not be taken as a sign of innocents.

Boromir: He suggests me as a possible candidate, which of course always makes me happy, but I am of course trying too look beyond that and I have reached the conclusion that his first post makes good sense. The fact that he is willing to look beyond the safest of votes (the people that feels innocent) and is willing to go down the more bold road is a good sign in my eyes and he finishes of with that observation about Shasta. I my self considered if I should mention that yesterday, but I did not feel that I had read well enough trough the days posting to conclude anything. . . besides I find it very easy to suspect people who agree/are friendly towards you.

People In The Middle:

Ilya: Makes a post about McCabber being a no trace kill and she is right, but I am not quite sure how to interpret it. Clearly it is not a wolfish scheme to fool us and it could very well just be an innocent stating the obvious because they lack anything else to stay, but want to contribute. It could also be a wolf unsure on what to do, who to cast suspicion on that gapped an opportunity to make a safe vote and thus maybe be perceived innocentish

People that does not make much sense:

Brinniel: Talks about how a certain number of Representatives will give a more fair representation of our village (Which I may add is THE GREATEST VILLAGE ON EARTH). The problem with this is that if we settle for a number then we give more freedom of choice to those that votes the first where as the people who votes the last have very few candidates to chose from. It is just a bad idea to make these kind of restrictions.

The Phantom:

The Phantom: Is dedicated if nothing else. . . I don’t know what to think of him, he makes some very good contributions to our debate, but he also flood posts and in the end I do not know if I should give him a pad on the back or imbed an ax in it. I guess it comes down to the fact that I cannot remember if I ever lived in the same village as "Fantomet" before, so I am not quite sure as what to expect from him other than something that w[/FONT]

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Ilya: Makes a post about McCabber being a no trace kill and she is right, but I am not quite sure how to interpret it. Clearly it is not a wolfish scheme to fool us and it could very well just be an innocent stating the obvious because they lack anything else to stay, but want to contribute. It could also be a wolf unsure on what to do, who to cast suspicion on that gapped an opportunity to make a safe vote and thus maybe be perceived innocentish

Okay... Rune, your English is slipping in that last sentence, I'm afraid, so I'm not quite sure what you were trying to say. Please clarify... because I'm mildly uneasy about Ilya, and I'd like to know what other people think about her.

As for stating the obvious– not a scheme to fool us, no, but you might describe it as "filler" posting. Though she is a newbie, so I guess it might not seem as obvious to her anyway.

Brinniel does the same thing later, which again has me worried a bit, because it does seem rather like deliberate "misdirected answering". That is, it had been said several times by then that McCaber was a safe kill, and the question was why were the wolves playing it so safe?

[Nerwen]

Brinniel and morm, you both say you want a fixed number of representatives, but have you given any thought as to how we would choose this number?

[Brinniel]

Originally Posted by Rune

The problem with this is that if we settle for a number then we give more freedom of choice to those that votes the first where as the people who votes the last have very few candidates to chose from. It is just a bad idea to make these kind of restrictions.

But isn't that always how it is? Whether it's for a rep or a lynch, the first voters choose whoever they want and the last voters are more limited in choices because if everyone chose someone different we would get nowhere. Now in voting for reps, the votes can be more spread out since only two votes are needed to make a rep which does give us more room to choose. But if everyone had a different opinion on who they wanted as a rep (or also the same) and voted whatever way they wanted regardless of previous votes, we could end up with very few reps. Because whatever the number of reps ends up being, I think it's better to have a larger number than smaller one. If everyone voted for the same reps or no one voted for the same and we ended up with a small number like 3 or 4, then it would not be very balanced...especially if a wolf's among them. So to prevent that, the later voters have to compromise and have some sort of restrictions.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Brinniel and morm, you both say you want a fixed number of representatives, but have you given any thought as to how we would choose this number?

I never said a fixed number, I said I had a preferred number. And quite honestly, there's no way to make a number set as like I said, everyone has their own agenda. Personally, I'd like to see a number in proportion to the village population and when I vote I'll keep that in mind....but there's nothing I can do to make others do the same.

Ugh, maybe I should just give up on trying to even argue this. No one seems to get me.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

That is, it had been said several times by then that McCaber was a safe kill, and the question was why were the wolves playing it so safe?

I was stating him as a no trace kill because I think that's more likely than say the wolves believing him a possible seer. Anyways, the problem with no trace kill is that it's difficult to figure out who would've chosen him...that's the whole point of it. If I had time, I would take a look at who would more likely make a safe kill than not but I'm running late for class...

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Well, often enough nobody looks particularly Seerish (from the lupine point-of-view) on Day One... but with all the posting yesterDay, you'd think someone would have fitted the bill.

That's what I was thinking.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

As I said, though, the other thing is that McCaber would have been perfect to keep around as a lynch candidate

Indeed. Coming into today I was prepared to paint him as suspicious looking, and I think there were others who would have agreed.

Of course it doesn't say much for our suspicions at this point.

Originally Posted by Brin

I don't understand why thinking about having a goal number of reps is weird...to me it's quite logical.

Okay.... Let's see if I can explain why I found it suspicious.

It's as if you're setting up a certain number as a goal, and that becomes the priority rather than choosing someone you've been leaning towards all day, or choosing someone you said you trust, or choosing a Rep that everyone agrees is innocent.

In other words, if it can be established that we should have a certain number, then you can fall back on that as an excuse to pick someone. Not that you can't always pick anyone for any excuse, but I felt that you were trying to, ahead of time, set up an excuse for doing something different.

Make sense?

EDIT: x-posted Brin

[Boromir88]

Sorry, Boro, but it would be improper to do a read-through on everyone except you.~the phantom

That is precisely why I'm quite comfortable with assuming your innocence. Don't you see? Not only are you doing your homework on a couple people within a certain classification, but you're doing your homework on everyone. No matter how daunting the task is, I just wish we could get someone on here who can do the work on you.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Rune

I guess it comes down to the fact that I cannot remember if I ever lived in the same village as "Fantomet" before, so I am not quite sure as what to expect from him

I understand. It's the same with my view of you.

Originally Posted by Brin

But if everyone had a different opinion on who they wanted as a rep (or also the same) and voted whatever way they wanted regardless of previous votes, we could end up with very few reps.

But do you think that would ever happen? Or if it did, what is so disasterous about having few Reps? It really puts them on the spot, doesn't it?

Originally Posted by Brin

Because whatever the number of reps ends up being, I think it's better to have a larger number than smaller one. If everyone voted for the same reps or no one voted for the same and we ended up with a small number like 3 or 4, then it would not be very balanced...especially if a wolf's among them.

So we have to balance out the Wolves? But how do we know two of our Reps weren't WWs yesterday? Or three even?

Originally Posted by Brin

So to prevent that, the later voters have to compromise and have some sort of restrictions.

The word "restrictions" is the last thing I want to hear when speaking of government.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Boro

That is precisely why I'm quite comfortable with assuming your innocence. Don't you see? Not only are you doing your homework on a couple people within a certain classification, but you're doing your homework on everyone.

Ah, well, glad to hear it!

I'm starting work on you now. If we're lucky I'll still see you as innocent and we can hunt the WWs together.

Originally Posted by Boro

No matter how daunting the task is, I just wish we could get someone on here who can do the work on you.

Heh heh heh... Yeah, that would be quite a job.

And good to see Agan. Speak your mind, dearie, for today I trust you.

[Aganzir]

Hmm while reading our brawl I figured I maybe shouldn't be so aggressive towards Lommy when accusing her because then she just becomes annoyed and it's harder to read her.

What happened after things got heated:

Shasta made a list of players, including Lommy and me as brawling innocents.

Phantom hoped our argument wouldn't be a waste of time and thought it would help to get a feel for us. He thought I'm innocent.

Nog thought I had better arguments but Lommy felt better (genuinely frustrated, although he pointed out that a wolf could feel frustration, too) so he reached the conclusion that we're both just quarrelling innocents.

Ilya didn't know what to make of Shasta's jumping on Gil multiple times, but to her it looked more suspicious than our brawl. I don't think their thing was very suspicious, though.

Boro didn't like how I backed off of Lommy after "a couple people" had said she looks genuinely frustrated. I think I was actually the first to say that - my backing off happened between Shasta & phantom's posts.
He also accused me of trying to deny I had a case against Lommy. Later he considered voting for me.

According to Ilya, I backed off of Lommy in a way that parroted what a lot of other people had said, and she didn't know what to think of that. I find this ignorant if not downright suspicious - it's rather she who's parroting what other people (Boro) have said instead of checking the facts herself. She's throwing a thing in the open without a comment of her own, like, "Look at this and reach your own conclusions! *wink wink*", and that's something I don't particularly like. Besides, before Boro people had just said Lommy and I were probably innocent, and it's weird how quickly Ilya's opinion changed (from not knowing what to think but apparently not finding very suspicious to suspecting) after accusations had seemingly started to pop up.

Morm found me innocent but didn't comment on our quarrel at first. Later he said he could find little merit in either argument and both Lommy and I were innocent.

Brinn thought both Lommy and me are ordos.

Other people either weren't around or didn't find our argument worth commenting.

Of these Ilya's reaction seems the most suspicious to me.
And I'm somehow surprised why so many people just labeled us as fighting innocents because
1) Lommy didn't seem innocent to me at all, except maybe in her replies
2) I can understand also those who thought I had weak points against her.
If Lommy's innocent, wouldn't it have been better for the wolves to encourage our suspicions of each other? But if she's a wolf, could she have fooled everybody, even with a lot of pressure on her? Or were the wolves just not around to take advantage of two innocents tearing each other apart? Or what.

If Lommy's a wolf, I could see Boro's reaction as wolfish as well since he attacked me for attacking Lommy. On the other hand it's also possible that he just wanted to try me so as to see if I broke under the pressure. But I have a bit hard time trying to see his reaction as honest - it looked like he was up to something.

Garr there are a thousand possible options and I don't want to spend all my time left on this so I'll leave it here and see if something occurs to me later.

I'm unlikely to x with anyone since I've kept refreshing the thread every now and then because thinking is so boring.

[Aganzir]

Somehow it seems these rep-selecting days are always quite busy for me. I'm going to see some friends in the evening so I have to vote in something like three hours. Will have more time tomorrow though.

Originally Posted by Boro

Agan, you made a case against Lommy. Have the spine to admit it. You listed Lommy as guilty and have gone after her, that's a case. Don't try to play it off like you really didn't mean anything by quoting Lommy repeatedly, post after post, and play it off like Lommy is being over-defensive.

I understood that Greenie was referring only to my list of players as a case, which it wasn't. I tend to divide players into categories while making lists, but that doesn't mean more than saying, "X is suspicious because of Y," on an alphabetical list, and I wouldn't consider it a case yet.
However, I have no problem admitting that my suspicions against Lommy were gradually turning into a case by the time I saw her response to my earlier accusations of her, to which I also replied in that very same post of mine as where I had the list.

Originally Posted by Boro

And now you're backing off, after a couple people say Lommy is looking genuinely frustrated (i.e. makes her look innocent)? Trying to seperate yourself from someone you wanted to get lynched?

I think I have made it clear since the beginning that as I always suspest Lommy, I don't know how much value I should put on my suspicions. Between my quarrel with her and the post which I believe you consider the "backing off" post, only Shasta said anything about her and me (=that we look like brawling innocents), and I wouldn't call it a couple people. Besides I would never ever back off of people I suspect without a good reason, as which a few people saying someone looks innocent doesn't count.
In my opinion Lommy's frustration looked more innocent than wolfish. Maybe I underestimate her but I believe she would have got rather jumpier if she's a wolf.

Originally Posted by Legate

When you want to talk to somebody, and he tells you he is in work uninterruptedly since 8 AM till 11 AM, are you going to invite him for a coffee at 10 AM, hoping that it will give you a chance to talk to him? Does it make sense? Really, I don't know what to think of what you say. You make no sense at all.

Well I don't think I said I don't have time, but that it's no use to expect I'd be around till deadline.

Originally Posted by Legate

Exaggeration! How can you build a case upon that? Really, this seems like really building up a case out of nothing. In Czech we say "sucking it out of your finger", I am not sure of any good equivalent. Simply, making it up out of nothing.

I was building my case on a bad feeling which some things just seemed to back up very well!

Originally Posted by Ilya

Agan backed off of Lommy in a way that parroted what a lot of other people said. Dunno what I think about that.

Could you point out to me how I parroted what other people had said about Lommy.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I'm mildly uneasy about Ilya, and I'd like to know what other people think about her.

The last sentence that was stuck in my head before I fell asleep last night was "Ilya's vote for Legate and her way of casting suspicion on me were fishy."

The things I want to do before I leave is
1) take a look at how people reacted to me & Lommy's little quarrel
2) take a look at Ilya
3) take a look at Nerwen
4) take a look at Ka.
Not sure if I have time for them all, though.

edit: xed with Brinn & phantom

[Thinlómien]

McCaber's dead?
I have an explanation no one has not offered yet and I wouldn't be surprised if it was the correct one.

I think he was killed because he didn't participate much. Some people tend to kill of non-contributing players on Night2 just to make the game more interesting and to be "fair". Also, some people avoid killing people they really enjoy playing with early on or feel bad about killing people who are obviously enjoying the game. (I'm not claiming it's unenjoyable to play with McCab but if he posts that little he doesn't give the sort of enjoyable vibe to anybody except those who despair at too long threads. )

Now, I will happily admit all the above goes for me. But as I'm not a wolf, I have to turn my glance elsewhere. Nogrod strikes me as a person who would suggest a kill like McC to his fellows. I could also see at least Agan, Nerwen, Boro and tp suggesting a kill like that, the ladies more than the gentlemen. And also someone else could come up with a kill like that - okay, almost anybody - so maybe this reasoning is not helping that much. But my gut reaction to Cabbie's death was "Ha! Nog's guilty!" I will try to resist that urge though. After Legate being lynched yesterDay, I wouldn't like to see Nog go toDay unless there's something concrete against him.

Originally Posted by Gwath

Based on his vote against me yesterDay, I am inclined to think that Nogrod is innocent. It seems unlikely to me that a werewolf, having been voted into power, would proceed to risk alienating half of his constituency by trying to have them executed.

I disagree. People's choices for reps will probably change every Day in about 90% of the cases, so there would be little harm in voting someone who voted you for rep, except that you may earn a personal enemy. And I don't think someone like Nog would care about that at all.

Oh, and given the chaotic nature of this game:

++No Filibuster

That should have been done yesterDay, if at all.

I have a bad feeling about the phantom.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Well, often enough nobody looks particularly Seerish (from the lupine point-of-view) on Day One...

I managed to misread "Seerish" as "Swedish" and get mightily confused for a second or two...

I will have a look at late yesterDay's posts now and reply to some stuff (I will try to resist the temptation to go on quarreling with Agan, but I feel there were some points I just have to reply to), and comment. Right now I only feel like saying two things about that I'm not going to give my vote away for testing purposes again. That lynch was incredibly silly (or wolvish, have to see and determine which one), because (at least from my point of view) Legate looked more innocent than most others and because I think the flood of votes was rather sudden and doesn't quite fit with the amount of actual suspicions targeted against him.


edit: eek - xed with Brinn's #492 and everything after that

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Okay... Rune, your English is slipping in that last sentence, I'm afraid, so I'm not quite sure what you were trying to say. Please clarify... because I'm mildly uneasy about Ilya, and I'd like to know what other people think about her.

As for stating the obvious– not a scheme to fool us, no, but you might describe it as "filler" posting. Though she is a newbie, so I guess it might not seem as obvious to her anyway.

Brinniel does the same thing later, which again has me worried a bit, because it does seem rather like deliberate "misdirected answering". That is, it had been said several times by then that McCaber was a safe kill, and the question was why were the wolves playing it so safe?

Slipping. . .bah. . .this is what happens when you write a post as the first thing after you wake up. Not only was I sleepy, but I was also under time pressure. (University demanding my time)
That being said; my written english is quite bad.

What I ment was: It could be that Ilya is a wolf who is unsure about what to do and therefor decides to state the obvious and seem helpful/innocent.