WW LXXXII: Return to Tol-in-Gaurhoth

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Me

Firstly, the reason I voted Shasta was not so much his behaviour but rather Lottie's very flimsy accusation. It was so off I actually felt that she might've known something we did not.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Fair enough, and the point did occur to me too– though I rejected it when she started saying "but I could be wrong". However, why didn't Shasta's flimsy accusation of Pitch also strike you as Seerish?

Why not? I suppose that although Shasta's accusation of Pitch also did seem weak (something almost unavoidable on a Day 1 unless a wolf makes a very foolish and blatant mistake I think), Lottie's motivation to attack Shasta was just plain ridiculous if she had honest intentions and as she, as we now know, isn't the Seer.

Originally Posted by Lottie

Really, though, not liking Shasta. Too non-confrontational, and the way he words this especially:

Originally Posted by Shasta

Wrong. The Hunter takes their current pick to the grave with them if lynched, regardless of alignment.

I mean, what in the name of Eru Illuvatar could been seen as suspicious in that? Not sure if a wolf would be so careless though...

[Boromir88]

I'm here til the DL. Right now, my vote is leaning towards Pitch.

Where's everyone buggered off to? I was actually hoping for a bit more chatter by the time I got back.

[skip spence]

This passage struck me as rather unnerving:

Originally Posted by Boro Day 1

Because the thing is, as long as we hold up our job in buying the gifteds as many days as we can and avoid the irrationally, more often than not, extremely damaging emotional lynches, than we usually fair very well against the wolves. No stupid lynches, it really is that simple, because everyone's been a wolf here before correct? And don't you just smirk and jump for joy anytime the village manages to lynch one of their gifteds? No stupid lynches, don't do the wolves work for them, and honestly we'll be fine as our chances of winning dramatically go up.

What exactly are you talking about Boro? No stupid lynches?? As if we wanted to be stupid and lynch our gifteds...

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by skip spence

What exactly are you talking about Boro? No stupid lynches?? As if we wanted to be stupid and lynch our gifteds...

Are you being serious? I think yesterday's lynch is clear enough to classify as a stupid lynch. But you're reading me wrong and interpretting stuff that just isn't there. I'm not saying anything about, "oh hoi there we like being stupid and lynch our own gifteds." I was trying to remind everyone of the dangers of Day 1.

We can't know a bad lynch from a good lynch until the outcome, but we can at least be a bit more reasonable than piling votes onto one person for trivial and weak reasons.

However, usually if someone can't be around to say anything or defend themselves from weak accusations they're usually given the benefit of the doubt for the day and allowed to respond the next. To keep piling up the posts onto a person who can't defend themselves is a bad decision. (It has nothing to do with taking a "moral high ground" it's just something that more often than not turns out badly. Pitch should know this from his first go as a seer. When he couldn't be at the DL to speak for himself and a bandwagon happened against him).

Also, being "defensive" doesn't necessarily mean a guaranteed wolf sign. So the multiple people ooh...Shasta's aggressive and defensive he's obviously suspicious, without considering he could have very good reasons to not want to be lynched is also a bad decision. It's the same thing when you get the feeling that someone is "up to something"...well yes a seer would probably be up to something, not everyone up to something = wolf.

That is why on Day 1's, I typically try to vote for someone who has left absolutely no impressions on me, because when we can't know anything for sure, voting for the person being "defensive" or the person "up to something," might be a wolf but wolvish behavior and gifted behavior is more similar than they are different. Where someone who is submarining is more than likely an ordo or a wolf trying to hide. Yeah, it sucks if the submarine is an ordo, but it's not nearly as bad of a decision as a vote for somebody who is leaving strong impressions on Day 1. And when you're just starting from scratch you can't tell, it's much safer to watch the person for a day or so, until you get a better idea of what he/she is doing. Instead of basing votes more on emotion because someone's aggressiveness or defensiveness or whatever random easy excuse someone can drum up.

Edit: crossed with everyone since Skip's post this responds to.

[Loslote]

Erm...I'm back...took longer than I'd thought. Still don't really have much of what could be called suspicion. I'd be willing to vote Greenie still - Legate not so much anymore. Is it just me, or is the same thing as happened yesterDay starting to happen to Pitchie? Yeah, there are better reasons, but I'd like to see at least some other options on the board toDay.

EDIT: xed since Boro's 186.

[wilwarin538]

So I see people are still rather confused about the possiblity of Pitch being Shasta's dream (I'm seeing lots of "he went after him so much, but that's just so obvious") and I feel the exact same way. So the solution to me seems to be to lynch Pitch. No, he may not look overly suspicious on his own, but our Seer thought he was, and we lynched the poor guy, so maybe we should do what he wanted to do?

If we're wrong than that will suck, and Shasta will have some explaining to do about why he went after Pitch so hard; if we're right than awesome, and we can move on to someone else toMorrow. Cause if we don't do this now, Pitch will still be a major point of discussion tomorrow, and I'd rather not waste so much time. Let's just find out.

++Pitchwife

If he turns up innocent than we can assume that Shasta dreamt Nerwen (or possibly Legate) and then we'll have someone we feel fairly good about, which is a good thing too. It just seems to me to be the most logical course of action, and the only way to have a better idea of who Shasta actually dreamed of, instead of just speculating indefinetely.

x'ed with Boro and Skip

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Lottie

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.

Fair enough, but I don't think you've convincingly explained yet why you picked out Shasta in the first place. And this

Originally Posted by Lottie

No. I went after him because his tone felt off - too defensive/aggresive.

is not a good answer, for his tone only changed after you accused him first for that utterly unsuspicious rules clarification.

Since somebody (I think Boro, but can't be bothered to check now) pointed out that I changed my mind about the Shasta-Lottie affair yesterDay - yep, I did, and I'm afraid Shasta going after me like he did played a part in that. I probably should have shrugged it off, and was quite willing to do so in the beginning (what Nog has called my 'defensive thoroughness' was mostly for the relish of demolishing that ridiculous case); it was only later in the Day that I had the misguided idea that Lottie could be the Seer, which made the balance shift against Shasta.

As for the building of the bandwagon, if it still matters:

Originally Posted by my voting post #96

EDIT: x-ed from #85 down

Glirdan's was #87 (but he x-ed himself with a lot of people)
(And yes, I really wavered that long over these few lines. Believe it. I wouldn't lie about technicalities even as a wolf.)

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Zil

As I already said here, I didn't think Lottie could be the Seer. I considered that skip might be. Since Shasta already looked odd, skip seemed more believable.

Sorry, I got that mixed up. Still, I mentioned that other possibility as well before you did.

Originally Posted by Zil

So skip explained his vote for Shasta without being asked? You asked him to explain it, did you not?

As you've apparently realized, I asked him to explain his undisclosed reasons, but I didn't suggest the answer he gave. That's what I meant.