WW LX - Mortal Men, doomed to die

[Brinniel]

Poor Kath does seem to get eaten a lot early in the game, doesn't she? Probably because she's so quiet and untraceable.

Hmm...I'm still trying to wrap my head around everything; I feel so behind. Strangely, none of the votes towards the end of yesterDay bother me. Usually at least one initially sticks out as particularly bad, but not this time. But surely there's gotta be at least one rotten apple among the end-of-Day voters. That's how it usually ends up.

I need to take a look at the earlier voters too and see if anything sticks out from them. My suspects? Uhhh... The only one who currently worries me is Eomer, and that is all based off gut feeling. I obviously need to give more thought and research to this. I will try to contribute something more before I go to bed, but I am awfully tired and lacking in sleep, so we'll see.

Sorry, as I still won't be able to give outstanding participation toDay, but at least I certainly should be able to do more than yesterDay. For one thing, it looks like I'll have time to post some and then vote tomorrow, which is nice since I really hate voting at night when the thread is dead. And no more randomness, promise. I know you all hate it, and I'd rather be helpful, even if my time is limited.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Interesting how many people bit at that.

"No! No! It can't possibly be a Seer hint! It had to be because Kath left no trail!"

Why so jumpy? I even asked you not to jump at me?

Look at Kath's list. She is neutral about everyone; except she says she is "keen" on Eomer and "not keen" on Shasta. Now, where I come from, "keen" can be significant.

I'm not going to press the point any further, as I'm very far from convinced myself. It's just funny how three (I think) people have jumped on this rejecting it immediately, not even entertaining the notion. This whole decision of leaving Kath-discussion down to "IT WAS A SAFE KILL - THE END" strikes me as lazy.

Back with more later, hopefully, depends how busy work is.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Look at Kath's list. She is neutral about everyone; except she says she is "keen" on Eomer and "not keen" on Shasta. Now, where I come from, "keen" can be significant.

I'm not going to press the point any further, as I'm very far from convinced myself. It's just funny how three (I think) people have jumped on this rejecting it immediately, not even entertaining the notion. This whole decision of leaving Kath-discussion down to "IT WAS A SAFE KILL - THE END" strikes me as lazy.

Yes, but to be fair, people might be afraid that you're a wraith taking advantage of the situation to make yourself look innocent. After all, whether they killed her for looking Seerish or not, the fact is that her death doesn't obviously point to anyone, so why would the guilty parties not want it discussed? (Unless there's something in her posts that the innocents haven't noticed.)

But the other question is– why a no-trace kill, if that's indeed what it was? There was plenty of suspicion being thrown around last Night– did no-one manage to suspect a wraith? Or did they, and the wraiths were too afraid of striking the Hunter? Were there no opportunities for them to frame someone else?

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Yes, but to be fair, people might be afraid that you're a wraith taking advantage of the situation to make yourself look innocent. After all, whether they killed her for looking Seerish or not, the fact is that her death doesn't obviously point to anyone, so why would the guilty parties not want it discussed? (Unless there's something in her posts that the innocents haven't noticed.)

But the other question is– why a no-trace kill, if that's indeed what it was? There was plenty of suspicion being thrown around last Night– did no-one manage to suspect a wraith? Or did they, and the wraiths were too afraid of striking the Hunter? Were there no opportunities for them to frame someone else?

I'm pleased someone else is not happy leaving it at NO TRACE KILL.

The point of Kath's death not obviously pointing to anyone speaks in favour of my hypothesis: namely, Kath left her dream (about me) as a hint. This makes Wilwa's comment that Kath would be sneakier in leaving a hint even odder : if Kath was so entirely unsubtle, why didn't anyone mention the obvious conclusion to draw except me. Well, no-one will take it seriously except me, it seems, and I can hardly gain information about my own role.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Forgive me for my rather brief appearance yesterday (and the attendant fit of madness), but I have just spent the rest of that DAY in the palace of Númenor, attempting to establish an embassy between their island and the land of my origin. Alas that a proper fear of outsiders is not limited to a few men.

However I am glad to return toDAY to this most interesting colloquy . . . A lot of you have forwarded ideas about the death of poor dear Kath the previous NIGHT, and somehow I am relieved that some of us here are thinking--and speaking their thoughts. An exchange of information among people of thought has been one of the paths to enlightenment.

Now I shall wander a bit around the court, listening to conversations I might have missed. *opens fan, covers lower half of the face*

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Interesting how many people bit at that.

"No! No! It can't possibly be a Seer hint! It had to be because Kath left no trail!"

Why so jumpy? I even asked you not to jump at me?

Look at Kath's list. She is neutral about everyone; except she says she is "keen" on Eomer and "not keen" on Shasta. Now, where I come from, "keen" can be significant.

I'm not going to press the point any further, as I'm very far from convinced myself. It's just funny how three (I think) people have jumped on this rejecting it immediately, not even entertaining the notion. This whole decision of leaving Kath-discussion down to "IT WAS A SAFE KILL - THE END" strikes me as lazy.

First of all, I agree with you that it's not good just to leave it as an "it was a safe kill - the end", but there really isn't that much she said that we have much to go on.
What I don't like, however is the the way that you are being jumpy by immediately labelling people who disagree with your comments as being jumpy. And don't they have a right to disagree with you? Especially when the way you put your ideas makes it seem obvious that you are innocent.
You speak reason, but I don't like your methods.