Ten Year Anniversary Game: Living Thread

[Nerwen]

Rune

#35.

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Personally I am loving the idea of empowering the dead! It seems like a very barrow-wightish thing to do, and perhaps it could evolve into a religion of sorts.

If we chose to tie the vote, I doubt that we would risk loosing data for us to analyze at a later stage. After all there is more to pack-behavior and whatnot than voting patterns.

Sorry for the shoret cameo, I will return again later.

Okay, so from his very first post he advocates a deliberate tie. (Is also in favour of the plan for communicating with the Dead.)

#79.
Banter. Contains a line about how he enjoys “killing Europeans”. This is clearly a joke in context (referring back to Agan and morm's exchange at #67, #69), but I suppose a very paranoid pack might have jumped on it.

#93.

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

So we are not going for a tied non-lynch today?

But rather we are going to at least attempt to get a baddie?

What a splendid idea! We all know what an incredible success rate we have on day 1, and obviously a well meaning effort always gets rewarded. Since when did sincerity become an excuse for failure?

ehm... I guess what I am trying to say, is that I still quite fancy that non-lynch thingy.

Also I will have to vote quite soon.

Stronger support than before for the non-lynch. Gets all sarcastic.

#101.
Banter with Greenie. Might possibly have been taken as a hint or code of some kind. (I doubt it is, though.)

#105.

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

I don't know if anybody used those words.

You want people to use intuition to vote intelligently?
Is there any meaningful way in which using your intuition, differentiates from reacting to erratic behaviour?

Sceptical of the possibility of “intelligent” Day One voting.

#106.

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Pathos much?

They must be having an interesting time in the Dead Thread...

#108.

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

I apologise for the successive posts.

I do really have to leave, and so will have to vote.

I can either vote Formendacil, since he volunteered, or I could vote for Greenie, since I do not care for the buddying up her and Nog is doing (also she mentioned Kant).

++Formendacil

Yup... I don't want to see Form gone, and I would be deeply saddened if this lead to his demise. Though I spoke ill about Greenie, I would hardly say that her actions merits the label "suspicious", "annoying" would be more fitting.

Second vote of the Day (first was Nilp's inevitable self-vote). It is also the only post of seven in which which he actually *says* anything, other than banter and arguing for a deliberate tie. As you
see, he expresses suspicion of Greenie and Nog, especially the former, but votes Form “because he volunteered”; stresses that he does not actually want Form lynched, and that he does not “really” suspect Greenie. This is fairly typical behaviour for a nervous Seer who has not yet dreamed a wolf and is afraid of dying early (which Rune often does) and having his words twisted after death. Taken with his jumpiness and obsession with the dangers of the lynch, I would say Rikae is likely correct that he was killed as a “gifted”. (An alternative, assuming #79 was taken as a double-bluff, was that he was killed a rival wolf.)

Further discussion points: If so, were the wolves right? And is Rik just guessing why he was killed, or does she know? (Really: it’s surprising how often a wolf will helpfully explain the reasoning behind the Night-kill…)

Edit: x'd since morm at #243; clarification; wrongly attributed opinion; highlighting.

[Firefoot]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Further discussion points: Were the wolves right? And is Rik just guessing why he was killed, or does she know? (Really: it’s surprising how often a wolf will helpfully explain the reasoning behind the Night-kill…)

I was also getting some bad vibes from Rikae, but don't have any reasons or analysis to back it up yet.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Firefoot

I was also getting some bad vibes from Rikae, but don't have any reasons or analysis to back it up yet.

Really? I was making more of a general observation rather than saying "I think Rikae is a wolf because of this", though I suppose I could have worded it better.
Actually, if anything's raising flags for me, just based on that line of reasoning, it's this post of Macalaure's (which appeared while I was doing the Runealysis, but which I didn't read properly, or I would have included it):

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Rune didn't do much, but he was, well, tense, without much reason. Could be the wolves took that as a sign of giftedness. His vote was for Formendacil, but it doesn't look like the vote was because he dreamt of him, but just because he was there. He also suspected Greenie, but again, not in a way that looks seer-ish to me. If he was gifted, then he wasn't the seer, and obviously not the hunter either. Losing ranger or lovers this early would hurt us. They're not bringing anything of value back to us at this point.

The tone of this, now, seems oddly confident of how the wolves reasoned and oddly specific. Of course one does try to look at things from the wolfish point of view, but Mac here seems to be slipping into it a little too easily for my liking.

[A Little Green]

Well, I suppose he did ask them to kill him. As for Runebug, I agree with Rikae, morm and Nerwen that the wolves might have had him down as a potential Seer with the way he seemed quite tense and the way he stressed that none of his suspicions was really a proper suspicion. Also, the exchange between Sally and morm (and others) looks very interesting, I'll get back to it in a moment. In any case, at least based on these two kills I'd say our two Wolfgangs (R.I.P. Nogrod) have very different strategies. The thing is, though, that even if they target the Seer, which they are likely to do, they won't know if they've caught him/her or not. Which means that they could spend the whole game targeting "potential Seers" (or, at least, until there's a reveal or something). Not sure how this is related to anything, but anyway.

Originally Posted by Morm

We did have a couple of no votes. I think Gwath ( no post), Nerwen and Green...any others? I understand Day 1 can be a bit crazy but the no vote bothers me too. I suspect Gwath was busy or didn't realize it had started, so there is a pass card. However, Greenie, if I remember, came in sounded reasonable, was safe in her posts and left without a vote...odd to me.

Odd to me too, I can tell you. I thought I'd go brush my teeth and then come back to vote before turning in, but instead I somehow forgot to vote and went to sleep! I plead being sick. Speaking of Gwath though, is he even playing? I mean, has he confirmed it? His only post in the Admin Thread was something like "I want to. I really shouldn't."

I have a ton of stuff from yesterDay and toDay I wanted to comment on, now off to check how much of it is still relevant!


EDIT: x.ed with Nilp and Shasta

[A Little Green]

I still have doubts about one thing regarding the scheme of agreeing signals for the Dead Thread vote (as in, empower X if Z was guilty, empower Y if Z was innocent, and so on). There was talk about putting choices for the dead "in different bandwagons" for increased flexibility, which I think is absolutely necessary for something like this to work. I am doubtful about the timing, however. In order for this to work, the living would have to have more or less voted first for there to be any "wagons" to place the choices for the dead in. At the same time, Agan's hypothetical point about Europeans in the Dead Thread was a valid one (especially as, at present, we do seem to have a European majority there): the deadline is 5 AM Finnish time, an hour or two less for the Danes and Brits and whoever else. Which means that European dead people can't really be expected to be around to wait for the village's instructions on which people in which wagons they should cast their votes to in order to relay a message. Can we realistically expect the village to (at least almost) finish voting hours before the deadline? Or would the dead leave their voting entirely in the hands of whoever of them happened to be around at deadline, whether wolf or not?

Originally Posted by Nog

Third: the dead thread will be confusing as well. With three possible deaths per day/night -cycle and them being able to check only one during the same interval there will be more unknowns than known people in there (as the Night-kills aren't automatically innocents).

Also this.

Then to Agan and Lommy's spat. First, we should bear in mind that those two are old friends and thus very good at annoying each other, and it was absurd o'clock at night so both were probably tired, too. I'm saying this because I think why it escalated had as much to do with these two factors as with werewolf. That isn't to say there wasn't other stuff going on too, though.

Basically, the whole thing started with this post by Agan:

Originally Posted by Agan

"We" obviously as in "us villagers", not as in "me and my wolf pack", duh!

This relating to her earlier "if we only kill Europeans" line. Lommy's argument is as follows:

Originally Posted by Lommy

This still exchange related to this post by Agan sounds rather fishy to me. So, as I read it, Agan is playing with scenarios and makes a joking example of the village only killing (= lynching) Europeans. Morm makes fun of her by implying she actually suggested doing that (since she's European herself, it's kind of double crazy idea). Agan misunderstands that morm is (half-jokingly) calling her out on saying "killing" instead of "lynching", which would imply she's one of the wolves (the term "killing" usually referring to Night kills) and she continues the joke from that angle. Basically I find it curious that Agan would interpret morm's comments in a way that would lead her to make a joking clarification about not making a Freudian slip about being a wolf. Like, I don't know why an innocent player would look at morm's comment from that angle. (Morm please clarify if I'm the one misreading your comment to Agan.)

So Lommy wasn't saying Agan's "me and my wolf pack" was a slip (which would be a stupid argument) but rather that her interpretation of morm's comment suggests a wolfish perspective. To which Agan reacts with these:

Originally Posted by Agan

ThinLOLmien is back! So I'm, what, your second oldest friend and suddenly you don't understand why I'd look at something from the villain's point of view? I understood morm's meaning perfectly and chose to continue the joke as I did because it's fun and joking about being a wolf is the closest I can get to being one.

Seriously though, just what would a wolf gain from saying "Hello I'm a wolf" when it would lead the other pack straight to her door? I'd imagine in a game like this, they will go to lengths to look as ordinary as possible, and I just don't understand why you think I'd have reacted like that as a wolf. Granted I'm tired but your trigger-happy jump is so poorly reasoned it genuinely annoys me and gives you a free ride to the top of my suspect list.

Originally Posted by Agan

++Lommy

She saw a straw and grasped at it.

Her village spokesperson idea was decent but I'm partly kind of offended that she chose to question my intelligence by holding a joke against me and partly suspicious of her "ERMAHGERD SLIP!!!111 Did ya see a SLIP!!!111" approach which would probably feel forced to me even if it wasn't about me.

I'm still in favour of the no-lynch, but I wouldn't mind seeing Lommy bite the dust.

This seems like a very strong reaction to an argument that may or may not have been correct but was, at least by Day 1 standards, decently reasoned. The question is, though, whether all of it can be attributed to Agan being tired and having a temper. It is also unclear whether she mistook Lommy's meaning or whether she presented it in that light to make the case look shoddier than it was - for Lommy wasn't suspecting Agan because of the "me and my wolf pack" but because of her interpretation of morm's comment.

Lommy starts getting annoyed too, and to be fair I can't really blame her:

Originally Posted by Lommy

1) I dislike my I'm-not-taking-myself-too-seriously personality being used as a way to discredit my arguments (like, I may be chatty and benevolent and a bit of a clown, but it doesn't mean I'm stupid and you know it and you're trying to use it to your advantage by framing this as "silly Lommy is being silly again" and that irks me)

2) I didn't suggest you intentionally said "hello I'm a wolf" (even though - now that you played the "why would a wolf say that" card I might reconsider...), I suggest you made a Freudian slip of sorts by accidentally revealing your wolvish perspective. And that has absolutely nothing to do with whether you fancy being a villain or not.

3) Well, you also cemented your - rather whimsically assigned; it was the typical Day1 level of reasoning - place on the top of my suspicion list by being so defensive. If you were innocent, you wouldn't be half as annoyed by me remarking on your wolvish perspective, and I suspect you're just enjoying your wolfing in this game with a nice pack and even the tiniest prospect that your enjoyment might be cut short both makes you fight back and gets on your nerves because you dislike being "busted" on something so trivial, especially if you indeed intentionally chose to comment on morm's joke from that angle and I was accusing you on the wrong grounds.

++Agan

Possible interpretations, then? Wolf-on-wolf? Not likely. They got too genuinely angry with each other, and besides, I don't think an open fight with a packmate would be a sensible strategy in this game, at this point. Wolf-on-wolf between wolves from different packs? Possible. Innocent-on-innocent? Sadly also possible. Wolf and innocent? If one of these two is a wolf I think Agan is a likelier candidate. Lommy started with an argument against Agan, then got offended by the belittling way Agan talked about her. (This might happen with Lommy whatever her role so I don't think it tells us much about her alignment.) Agan, meanwhile, got offended by being suspected on what she thought were flimsy grounds - which, while annoying, shouldn't provoke a reaction quite that strong. I also agree with Cabbie and Shasta that Agan's retaliatory suspicion of Lommy looks a bit off. Of course it's possible that an innocent Agan mixed personal feelings with suspicion (that does happen), but I don't know if she would really fall into that trap. However, trying to turn a personal quarrel into something other players could latch onto is something an Aganwolf might want to do.

Another thing - wolves have no more reason to grasp at straws in this game than anyone else. A wolf making up a case just to look like they're suspecting somebody doesn't make sense because they, too, need to hunt wolves. And as for genuinely making a case on (too) little evidence, that can be done by wolves and innocents alike. Therefore, "she's grasping at straws" isn't a very strong argument against anyone in this game.

Originally Posted by Legate

Aside from the "tie or not to tie" discussion and so on, of the moments that "stood out", the only weird thing about the Agan-Morm exchange to me was Greenie's reaction to it, "defensive" one:

Just kinda defensive, because I think it seemed pretty clear that it was not meant the way Greenie is interpreting it???

You lost me here, Legate. Defensive of what? It was not meant in what way?

Originally Posted by Legate

Greenie - just too happy with too many smileys at some point; she had reasonable points, but she is not stupid. I have no idea what to make of the comment to Agan I mentioned above, although now it seems to me like that was rather random. But that's just the sauce; bottom line being, her "I am the nice clever helpful girl next door" attitude is sort of making me wonder whether it is genuine. Probably one of my choices for vote toDay.

Awesome, can I now join the esteemed club of people who get suspected for their use of smileys? Also, "she had reasonable points, but she is not stupid" is probably the best thing anyone's ever said about me. Seriously though, all I can say is that suspecting me because I act nice is rather like suspecting you because you write long, confusing posts. Oh wait. I've actually seen people do that.


EDIT: x-ed since my last. Writing a novel takes ages! I think I understand George R. R. Martin better now.