WW LXXXII: Return to Tol-in-Gaurhoth

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Glirdan

He never had any real suspicion behind Pitch and never mentions Nerwen in any of his posts afterwards. I'm inclined to believe that, if there was hint, it was towards Nerwen. Shasta is no fool when it comes to this game and would be subtle about leaving his hints, and I think that's about as subtle as it comes. He didn't want to draw attention to Nerwen.

I'd just like to say that, if Pitchie is a dream'd wolf, a packmate would press the Nerwen-dream. But in general Glirdy's tone in this game has been very non-wolfish, and I'm inclined to trust him...or at least, not vote him.

[Glirdan]

Okay, well I sadly must depart for work shortly and will be unable to post until I get off. Hopefully some conversation might happen whilst I'm away

[wilwarin538]

First off, I'd like to say I don't completely understand why Shasta was voted for by soooo many people. I didn't really think he was that suspicious (his case against Pitch was weird, I'll get back to that, but not *that* suspicious) and then everyone just pounced on him. I mean a couple votes would have made sense, but like 7? Seriously...

So I initially thought that Pitchwolf must have been Shasta's dream, but the more I think about it the more it seems way too obvious to me. I don't know if Shasta would be quite so obvious, since that would paint a huge target on his head for the wolvies. An innocent Nerwen dream seems more likely to me, I'll look at his posts again though once I've slept.

And...I'll stop there. I'm going to go sleep and I have the day off tomorrow (save for a nice little pile of homework) so I should be on fairly regularly.

x'ed with Boro

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Nerwen - Nerwen, a question. Whom would you have voted in case you happened to be around earlier? I know it doesn't matter so much anymore and you can make up whatever you wish, but anyway I would like to hear the answer...

All right. I would have probably voted for Lottie or Greenie (i.e. a throwaway– Nog can make of that what he likes). No, not Shasta. I'm not just saying this to play that annoying game of, "Ooo, look, I kept my hands clean by not voting, now I will act like this makes me morally superior". While I did agree that his and Lottie's interactions might be wolf-on-wolf, I also thought if it was only one of them, Lottie was more likely.

On that note, I think the "Shasta looks wolfier" meme of yesterDay needs examining. I couldn't see that at the time and I don't see it now.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I share the anticipation of hearing what Lottie has to say. She tends to be "naturally suspicious" (as I think I phrased it yesterDay) and so her looking that way is no news and says nothing about her lupinity. Also I think that the probability of her being a wolf rested on the scenario of them having a wolf-on-wolf yesterDay.

No, not at all. Why do you think that?

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I see Legate keeps repeating this "Shasta was in no way suspicious-looking" -mantra - and it makes me worried. It does feel like the wisdom of the Owl of Minerva only taking to flight after the fact - or of someone who wishes others not to see the facts as they are - namely what Boro brought forwards from yesterDay.

I suspected Shasta for real yeaterDay - and was wrong, and sadly know better now. But him being the seer quite so explains the "out of the blue" consistent attacks on Pitchie - and the oddish case he made against him, and why he didn't vote for Lottie but Pitchie in the end. So those things that made him look so suspicious...

Oh, yes, I understand why Shasta looked suspicious– and obviously voting for him can't in itself be a sign of guilt– but the thing is, everything you could say about him you could also say about Lottie, and then some. (No, I'm not saying Lottie's necessarily guilty, either– just making a point.) So, I'm honestly quite puzzled why he was the one lynched.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

The only thing that bothers me with this interpretation is that it makes Shasta quite a reckless seer. That for sure merits some consideration as well. Is there any better explanation to his dream from N1?

It's been said already– he could have dreamed me as an innocent. However, let us suppose Shasta did in fact dream Pitch– perhaps he was trying to provoke Mr Agreeable Wolf into a response? Or trying to leave a trail back to him in case he died? A bit clumsy, yes, but it was my jewel's first time as a Seer.

EDIT:X'd with Wilwa.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Glirdan

Here's a thought. Maybe it was Nerwen who the Ranger protected? The Wolves would be smart and go through the game thread and examine every last post and think of the possible meanings, especially after having Shasta revealed as the Seer. They already know that Nerwen is innocent, so why not tie up any loose threads and be done with her so that we couldn't have a known innocent? Maybe the Ranger also picked up on it and that's who he/she chose to protect?

No reason why it couldn't have played out that way. Only a few know for sure though.

Originally Posted by Glirdan

Perhaps his strong pressing against Pitch would have something to do with the fact that our dead Seer was strongly against Pitch. I don't know just a theory. I find this suspicion rather disconcerting.

Seconded. We don't know what Shasta was up to, but his dreaming a Pitchwolf must at least be a strong possibility. Why is someone discussing that a cause for alarm?

Originally Posted by Nerwen

All right. I would have probably voted for Lottie or Greenie (i.e. a throwaway– Nog can make of that what he likes).

I think you've said why Lottie would have been an option for you, but out of curiosity, why Greenie?

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I think you've said why Lottie would have been an option for you, but out of curiosity, why Greenie?

I didn't like the way she said Lottie sounded "very genuine", or whatever it was. I know one can't expect everyone to see things the same way, but I thought it pretty obvious that Lottie, whatever her role, was up to something, and that the reasons she gave for suspecting Shasta were quite contrived– c.f. her own explanation toDay.

At least, they're the people I was thinking about when I signed off yesterDay. I might have thrown some others into the mix if I'd been around later.

I maintain that bandwagon was weird, and that those saying, "yes, but he WAS suspicious!" are missing the point. Everyone involved was moderately to highly experienced– did it really occur to none of you that a big, near-unanimous bandwagon on Day One probably wasn't the best idea?*

Apparently not. So– I say there was some pretty skilful manipulation going on yesterDay. We may be able to find traces.




*If someone's extremely suspicious, that's different– but once again, I don't see that Shasta was.

[Loslote]

Nerwen's explanation makes a lot of sense, and Greenie hadn't been untalked about - more than one person commented on her post. Coupled with her late bandwagon-vote, she doesn't exactly make my list of people I'm not voting for - which, in case anyone was wondering (doubtful ) consists primarily of:

Glirdy and Zil as not-evil;
Boro and Nerwen (as intelligent).

Not-trusted:
Pitchie because of uncertainty as to whether Shasta dreamed him evil or not;
Nog because he makes me uneasy;
Legate because he seems just a bit too smooth (don't really suspect him for it, but don't trust him because of it, either);
Ozzy because I don't know him well enough to read him yet (and I can just see the wolves pulling off a brilliant double-bluff by making a newbie seem totally well adjusted);
Everyone Else because I haven't noticed anything about them.

SO yeah. Not going to vote for People I Am Not Voting For. Probably not Ozzy, Nog, Pitchie, or most of the people I haven't noticed. Which leaves Legate, Greenie, or a random sub-ish person. Preferably not random sub-ish person.

I'll be on again in the morning, but I don't know how much. It won't be sleep time for another hour or so, either, so I'll be around...some...toDay...

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Loslote

Nerwen's explanation makes a lot of sense, and Greenie hadn't been untalked about - more than one person commented on her post. Coupled with her late bandwagon-vote, she doesn't exactly make my list of people I'm not voting for - which, in case anyone was wondering (doubtful ) consists primarily of:

Glirdy and Zil as not-evil;
Boro and Nerwen (as intelligent).

Not-trusted:
Pitchie because of uncertainty as to whether Shasta dreamed him evil or not;
Nog because he makes me uneasy;
Legate because he seems just a bit too smooth (don't really suspect him for it, but don't trust him because of it, either);
Ozzy because I don't know him well enough to read him yet (and I can just see the wolves pulling off a brilliant double-bluff by making a newbie seem totally well adjusted);
Everyone Else because I haven't noticed anything about them.

SO yeah. Not going to vote for People I Am Not Voting For. Probably not Ozzy, Nog, Pitchie, or most of the people I haven't noticed. Which leaves Legate, Greenie, or a random sub-ish person. Preferably not random sub-ish person.

Hang on. Why Legate and Greenie over the others in you "not-trusted" list?

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I don't have so much time now, replying to some posts, but not to all... will look at the rest when I come back...

Originally Posted by Glirdan

I hate to be the one to blatantly point out the obvious, but all Day 1 lynches are completely random unless a Seer were to stupidly reveal themselves on Day 1 for one Wolf. And what do you mean, "the worst thing about the Seer-lynch"? You mean there WAS something good in lynching our Seer on Day 1? Because if there is I would very much like to hear what. I see no upside to having lynched our Seer yesterDay. Yes I know I was one of those advocating for it, but that is because I actually had suspicions of him on Day 1.

There is of course nothing good at lynching the Seer, but the worst (which is worse than "bad", in case you were wondering) is that it cannot even give us much material to analyse. There would have been something sort-of positive if we could at least get clues from it. But this is pointless, as I have already concluded that there already is something to find there. See above...

I see you're point at the end. Yet he could simply be a mere innocent who did not want to join the mob. May I ask why you are more suspicious of him then say, Wilwa, who not only did the exact same thing as he, but even more so as she was the last to vote?

It is the way it is phrased and the way they use it. The main point is not just the vote itself, but also how the people explain it. Wilwa's explanation seemed innocent, whereas Ozzy seemed more likely fake to me, see above the posts toDay where I am discussing with him.

Well that's funny because I just went back through your posts and nowhere do you mention having any form of opinion on myself and I think you only mentioned Skip once and that was asking to hear more of him in post #45

It is possible I didn't mention you, but I was curious about you. Late in the Day, as you know, I didn't have time and so didn't post anything long where I could list my opinions on everybody.

Here's a thought. Maybe it was Nerwen who the Ranger protected? The Wolves would be smart and go through the game thread and examine every last post and think of the possible meanings, especially after having Shasta revealed as the Seer. They already know that Nerwen is innocent, so why not tie up any loose threads and be done with her so that we couldn't have a known innocent? Maybe the Ranger also picked up on it and that's who he/she chose to protect?

That's not a bad idea, of course given if Nerwen is innocent. I am not 100% sure neither of Boro's strong suggestion that it is evil Pitch who was the dream (okay, but now I see he clarified it and said it was meant differently), nor Glirdy's who seems to suggest rather strongly that it was innocent Nerwen... but we'll see. I'll think of it when I come back.

There is something unnerving me about Lottie's recent post, if I say it shortly, sort of hypocrisy or what... it looks like that... ("oh you lynched shasta"). I know an innocent can start a bandwaggon unwillingly, but still this looks fake.

Whatever... gotta really run now! Will be back in several hours.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, time to vote is getting near for me. Actually upon reading her posts, I am now inclined to vote Lottie toDay. Seriously, especially her toDay's posts are just... bad. (And that said, the suspicion for the strange way she behaved in relation to Shasta yesterDay still holds, of course, too.)

Originally Posted by Loslote

First off - what the hey? What was that? That bandwagon has got to be one of the silliest bandwagons I've seen in a long time (and the fact that I've seen sillier is just sad. ). And by 'that bandwagon', I mostly mean the...five, was it, people who voted close to each other, towards the end. Did you guys see no problems in this situation?

This is one of the things. I know and can understand, like I have said already, that an innocent can start a bandwaggon which ends up with lynching the Seer, and she does not even know what she does will turn into a bandwaggon (of course she does not!). She can also still scorn the people for lynching the Seer. Of course, she has the right to, it is a harm to everyone in the village. But this way Lottie does it is incredible hypocrisy, I say. "Did you guys see no problem in the bandwaggon I have started?" I mean, I am really curious what would you say had you been around yesterDay at that time. Only if you said "wait, now I am beginning to doubt whether I voted well", I would be able to let you pass with the above. But generally if you vote for somebody, you want them lynched, right? But this way... no word about one's own role in the stuff, although I don't expect you to come crying and begging us for forgiveness, still this is like totally forgetting that you were the one who started it all.

Yeah, I realized later that my disclaimers could look Seerish. After I noticed that, my 'plan' was to lynch Shasta, who was supposed to be a wolf, and then maybe/hopefully the wolves would kill me instead of the real Seer. Yeah. That went well. Now pardon me while I go head-desk for a few minutes...

I just don't believe it. That looks fake. There's been, btw, already about half a dozen people claiming they voted as they did because they thought somebody was the Seer or something... but this one looks just the least credible of all. It looks fabricated. (And just as a sort of addendum, these rolleyes-smileys all over the place also don't add to the credibility.)

Originally Posted by Loslote

I'd just like to say that, if Pitchie is a dream'd wolf, a packmate would press the Nerwen-dream. But in general Glirdy's tone in this game has been very non-wolfish, and I'm inclined to trust him...or at least, not vote him.

This is one typical thing the Wolves just do: "btw, you people might also want to start suspecting this one, because he did XY, you know. But actually I am not suspecting him. I am just saying, so that you know." Don't like it either.

Originally Posted by Loslote

Nerwen's explanation makes a lot of sense, and Greenie hadn't been untalked about - more than one person commented on her post. Coupled with her late bandwagon-vote, she doesn't exactly make my list of people I'm not voting for - which, in case anyone was wondering (doubtful) consists primarily of:

Glirdy and Zil as not-evil;
Boro and Nerwen (as intelligent).

Not-trusted:
Pitchie because of uncertainty as to whether Shasta dreamed him evil or not;
Nog because he makes me uneasy;
Legate because he seems just a bit too smooth (don't really suspect him for it, but don't trust him because of it, either);
Ozzy because I don't know him well enough to read him yet (and I can just see the wolves pulling off a brilliant double-bluff by making a newbie seem totally well adjusted);
Everyone Else because I haven't noticed anything about them.

SO yeah. Not going to vote for People I Am Not Voting For. Probably not Ozzy, Nog, Pitchie, or most of the people I haven't noticed. Which leaves Legate, Greenie, or a random sub-ish person. Preferably not random sub-ish person.

And then this last one with the list of people... agreeing with Nerwen and sort of emphasising "pardoning" her (cf. what's been said about agreeable Wolves here, and Wolves can be really nice and pardon people, especially since they know who is innocent and who probably really didn't mean anything wrong by what they did, etc.)...

And where did this Greenie suspicion come from anyway? I don't see her even in Lottie's list. Isn't it per any chance picking on what Nerwen just said about suspecting her, or a slip of mind where she noted to herself - as a Wolf - "Nerwen seemed to suspect Greenie, from now on I am pretending to trust her because of that explanation" and accidentally then messing it up in her head and writing her among the suspects? I can see that happening to a Wolf...

All in all, my vote probably goes there... just going to look if perchance anybody didn't post meanwhile and then I go...