Tol-in-Gaurhoth IV (The Saga, erm, Still Continues...)

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I accidentally said outright that I am a werewolf with a malevolent eye? You rascal lmp!

By mistakes I referred to the trusting of fallacious reasoning. I did not refer to switching my 'her's' and my 'my's' in a tale including 'her' and 'me'.

But I know all about your trickery, o yes! I remember the japes we used to pull in our younger days. Remember that goat we set loose in Evisse's garden? Those were the days....

*ahem*

Anywho, you really haven't lived life yet, if you ain't got no regrets. And I am regretting my lazy use of possessive pronouns....

Why do I think that someone will vote for me on that basis....

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Okay, I'll admit that saying the Seer is expendable is a little hasty of me. Wait... no I won't.

Right now, we have a Seer. He or she knows somebody's identity. Chances are high that he or she knows the identity of somebody that, quite frankly, we don't care about.

So we'll kill an innocent today. The wolves will kill an innocent tonight. There's a chance, however small, that the wolves are going to kill our Seer tonight any how, unless of course he or she comes out and says "Hey everybody, I'm the Seer. Ranger, you need to protect me tonight." In that case, the wolves have the chance of slaughtering the Ranger instead, and then the Seer is up for grabs the next night.

Or the wolves swipe the hunter, and two people die. Or, of course, the wolves swipe one of tp's expendable innocents, and apparently nobody cares, right?

My point is, that, probability for day one aside, your numbers aren't going to help us win the game, because there is the human error quotient. The Seer could be killed tonight, and then you wasted a life for nothing.

Any how, since nobody is going to listen to me about my opinion on tp's colossally stupid kill-plan, here's a brain-teaser.

Neither Anguirel nor Lalaith have posted yet, and yet Eomer's accused them both. Twice. Why, Eomer?

[the phantom]

Chances are high that he or she knows the identity of somebody that, quite frankly, we don't care about.

Wrong.

If the seer is able to identify someone as being innocent, it is extremely valuable if you know how to use the information.

If the number of proven innocents ever equals the number of wolves then the villagers automatically win if they behave correctly.

I don't expect you to see how that works. It's a bit complicated and tough to figure out at first, but it's true.

There's a chance, however small, that the wolves are going to kill our Seer tonight any how, unless of course he or she comes out and says "Hey everybody, I'm the Seer. Ranger, you need to protect me tonight." In that case, the wolves have the chance of slaughtering the Ranger instead, and then the Seer is up for grabs the next night.... The Seer could be killed tonight, and then you wasted a life for nothing.

The chance of the seer or Ranger getting killed during the night will not be affected by who we kill today, so no, the life will not have been wasted.

If they kill the seer then they kill the seer. There's nothing we can do about that.

I'll take my chances with luck

Luck over a more statistically sound plan?

Typical seventeen year old.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

If the number of proven innocents ever equals the number of wolves then the villagers automatically win if they behave correctly.

I don't expect you to see how that works. It's a bit complicated and tough to figure out at first, but it's true.

Just because I don't like your plan doesn't mean that I don't understand it, or that I don't think it has a number of merits. So don't bother with the condescending and infuriating "I don't expect you to understand" and the "typical seventeen year old" stuff.

Clarify this part of it for me: the Seer (or whoever else it is in your head) knows that these three are innocent. How does he or she convey this information to the rest of the innocents without the wolves finding out also?

The chance of the seer or Ranger getting killed during the night will not be affected by who we kill today

Sure it will, math-boy. If we take one innocent out of the pool, then there are less people for the wolves to kill, thereby increasing their chance of randomly selecting someone we want to keep. If you need smaller numbers, here are some.

There are three fish in the pond, a blue fish, a red fish, and an orange fish. The fisherman is guaranteed to catch one. He has a 1:3 chance of catching the blue fish. If we take out the orange fish and leave it on the shore to die or something equally gross, then there are only two fish left. It means that the fisherman now has a 1:2 chance of getting the blue fish. Capiche?

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

*spit* I'm innocent. I'll volunteer.

Volunteer for what, may I ask?

I dunno. "Volunteerin'" sounds mighty fun. *cough*

By de whey, Eomer, thanks for keeping my role alive, pardner. Someone suspicious ain't one if he ain't suspicious, if y'all know wat I mean. *spit*

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Why would Eomer point to one person?

Why two?

Or why any at all?

Why would the phantom suggest such daring, excellent, yet glaringly flawed plan? And why would Fea and Azaelia violently oppose it if nobody would be volunteering anyway?

And Saurreg, who is this FN??

Why ask this questions? Are you trying to point something out, but are too scared to be seen pointing?

Hush, alter-ego. You're not supposed to be here. I'm the only one who joined, remember? I don't see your name on tgwbs's list, don't I?

[Evisse the Blue]

Simple. Neat. And wrong.


Looking back, and if I had brains enough to count correctly, I see that we have 5 against the plan, and 5 basically agreeing with the plan. This tells us...absolutely nothing... Except that everyone is pretty much as confused as I am. Even those that didn't agree see this one major flaw that nobody will volunteer. Oops, wait, someone did volunteer. That means we found our scapegoat, did we? Who better to lynch than the suspicious guy?

Would this plan work if it were not done in the first two days? Could we go back to it in the later stages with the same effect?

What would be the point of that? I understood the only benefit of this plan is that it can be used in the beginning stages when we have not much to be suspicious of. Although, some suspicions are clearly forming, even at this stage *looks at the web of accusations, insults, slips. etc*

Well, I'm off to make the pizza, y'all must be hungry after all this fighting. Except those of you who feasted last night, that is.

[Lalaith]

This is hard. I must be away from the village now, and won't be back until the end of the vote.
I had hoped that by now some votes would have been cast. To be the first to name a lynching victim is a difficult thing, both morally and strategically.

Like Evisse, I am confused by many things. Was Feanor's and phantom's fight indeed a smokescreen, as lmp suggests? On the other hand, why were Eomer and phantom so keen to label our artist crazy? She made mostly good sense to me. And what of the fence-sitters, who backed phantom's plan and whose only objections were pragmatic (no-one volunteering) rather than moral?
Phantom's strategy is based on a risk-adverse principle - killing an innocent as a safeguard because the chances of lynching a gifted villager being too high. Yet his own behaviour has been the opposite of risk-adverse. He has been running the risk - if of course he is himself a non-werewolf - of being identified, rightly or wrongly, by the werewolves as a gifted villager. Of course, our healer is a clever and complicated person, and so contradictory behaviour from him is less suspicious than from someone else. But still....
I will have another cup of coffee before I leave, and mull over what scarce evidence we have so far, and try to pluck up the courage to cast my vote.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

For every complex problem, there is a solution that is
Simple. Neat. And wrong.

Only too true.

Phantom, if lynching the gifted villager is dangerous, is not lynching a werewolf more dangerous? The longer we leave them to roam, the less chance of winning we have. If we do get rid of the gifted one, then yeah, its a set back, but we'll just have to work a little harder, look deeper and use the large thing between our ears.

[Lalaith]

Curses. With so many strong opinion formers in this village, I never thought it would fall to me to be the first to stick my head above the parapet. But circumstances sadly dictate it. The lady of the manor was last night blessed with issue and I must away to collect my new charge, and will not return until after the lynching. I know I could simply not vote at all. But we village women fought a bitter battle for the vote, and it would be wrong not to use this hard-won democratic right. Well, here goes.

There is little chance of lynching a guilty person today and this weighs heavily on my conscience.
To help me in my choice I have split the village into three groups.
There are those who have been completely silent: Anguirel, Esgallhugwen.
There are those who have been most outspoken: phantom, lmp, Feanor, Eomer.
There are those who come somewhere inbetween: Azaelia, Celuien, dancing spawn, Evisse, Firefoot , Hookbill, Kath, Nilp Felagund, Oddwen, Saurreg and myself.
Now, I don't think any of this is necessarily significant. Personal circumstances and personality differences come into play here, I know, as much as innocence or guilt. But I tend to agree with phantom's point that a noisy person can be useful to have around for a while, whether they are wolf or human. The silent group should have a chance to speak, so I will pick a name, more or less at random, from the middle group. As I didn't like phantom's volunteer victim plan, I will pick someone who was more inclined to support it: +++KATH.
I am sorry, and I hold my nominee no particular grudge, but someone had to be named.

[Celuien]

The time for a vote is drawing near, and I'm still so lost.

After consideration, my final vote on the phantom's plan will have to be a no. I think it was a rational enough plan, but I don't see enough of a risk/benefit trade-off to justify going after a known innocent (not to repeat myself too much), even with the volunteer that we now have.

And now a quick disclaimer: the following opinions and theories are related solely to events on day one. Future deviations from these theories should be taken in the context of the day on which they occur and not necessarily considered flip-floppin or werewolf-like behavior.

At this point, the phantom, Fea and Eomer are at the bottom of my suspect list. The plan put forward by the phantom does seem to have been put forward with the interest of the village at heart, even if I can't agree with it. Fea's actions in the argument look to be more like debate than trying to set anyone up for lynching.

Eomer has been mentioned as a suspect based on his slip of the tongue earlier, but I don't think it makes him a wolf. If it's a genuine mistake, it's one that a smart wolf wouldn't be likely to make since they have to be guarded. It's too easy for us to pick up on something small as an excuse for lynching on the first day. If it's intentional, it's also un-wolf-like because it's too obvious a double-blind for a wolf, again leading to lynching. But I can think of a good reason for an innocent to put a baited slip like that out for discussion.

I'm not sure what to think of lmp, but I like the poetry. And I think it's a good idea to keep louder participants around for a while.

This, of course, leaves me with a wide field from which to pick my vote. I have some other theories as well, but this isn't a good time to put them forward. I need more data, and I'm afraid of causing confusion or aiding the wolves if I put my idea out too soon, whether I'm right or wrong. But RL is calling at the moment so further discussion and my vote will have to wait for a bit.