Werewolf XXX - Tol-in-Elendili - The Isle of the Were-Faithfuls

[Thinlómien]

...and toDay I will probably unleash the flood-posting Kath has missed so much, since I'm going to spend the week-end in Nogrod's place... So all that prevents me from flood posting should be Nogrod's need to play werewolf too and some minor things (social duties to keep company to my sister, eating, doing maybe some schoolwork...). Anyway, this time, I will be able to hang around 'til the deadline.

~*~

There's one rather bad thing in our situation. We can't conclude anything from the wolf kills. By forcing the seer reveal we have launched a series of events that dictates the wolves their kills. There's nothing you can conclude from killing Rikae. Any wolf would like to get rid of a seer. Likewise, when Nogrod dies, we can't conclude anything from it.

Admittedly we could analyse who of us villagers would, as wolves, attack Rikae though ranger might be protecting her, but I doubt the discussion would be fruitful. (Because we would probably end up in a half the villagers would, half the villagers wouldn't -situation, but our results wouldn't tell us anything, since the wolf kills are decided by three different people, not just one, and we can't know whether one, two or three wolves were for attacking Rikae on Night2... In my opinion we'd just lose time and effort.)

~*~

Originally Posted by Lalaith

I seem to remember another village, plagued by wizards, where there was a suggestion that the known innocent, an ally of the Good Wizard, should chose the lynching candidate. I cannot remember now whether the suggestion was taken up.
But what do you think of this suggestion? Does anyone have any others? Nogrod, what do you think?

I still dislike this kind of suggestions! They smell wolvish "easy solutions". Wouldn't it be very nice for a wolf just to vote someone the known innocent suggests and not to have to make up own theories/suspects?

Doing a lynching candidate list by a known innocent only makes sense when the known innocent knows more than the others. For example, if s/he knows the gifteds' identities s/he can prevent them from getting lynched by making the list and everyone following it. (If I recall correctly, that was the case in Dueling Wizards.) That isn't the case right now.

Nogrod doesn't know anything more than we others do. Thus, I don't think he should make a lynch candidate list. He should, however, give some honest innocent opinions for us to chew. Then we innocents have two (instead of the normal one) 100% surely innocent opinions in our head, his and our own. So, what I actually mean, is that I'm against Nogrod becoming or being made some god who dictates everything, but I'm strongly for him becoming the village official councellor. Everybody should heed his advice, but no innocent has a reason to trust his judgement any more than his/her own (unless s/he believes Nogrod to be more intelligent than him/herself, but that's a whole different matter...).

I'm suspicious of TGWBS and Lalaith because of these suggestions I find unreasonable and harmful to the village. (Though, in TGWBS's defense, I must say he has had these weird tactics suggestions before... )

[Thinlómien]

I think no one should start toDay what some started yesterday: trying to find clues from Roa's posts. It's just useless. She's cunning enough to make the posts misleading and as she had no real information, the analyser would be wasting his/her time.

Except if s/he was a faithful? I can't see anyone else having a motive to analyse Roa's posts. A faithful could use this to sway the discussion, confuse the village and to look helpful. This brings me back to my suspicions of TGWBS.

~*~

Durelin bugs me.

Originally Posted by Durelin

Way to go Rikae!! With just two dreams, you have nailed the Cobbler. Though there are still four wolves out there, we finally might have a lead on something.

I don't think anyone else than the faithfuls are delighted to have the seer not dreamed about even one wolf before she dies. I mean, her attitude seems too joyful... While it's a good thing that the cobbler's nailed, Durelin seems a bit overjoyed... maybe because she and her companions are in no danger of being dreamed about anymore?

She has said other things that make me wary too... For example, she, like TGWBS, tries to make conclusions from Roa's posts.

I didn't like her first Day1 vote. It was too hasty.

All in all, she agrees and rejoices far too much... (Though I was accused of being too calm and cheerful in last game - I was an ordo - so maybe I shouldn't be accusing anyone of that...)

However, her reminding about that Roa can still harm the village with her votes strikes me as non-faithfulish... but Roa's game was pretty lost at that phase, so maybe she was just playing tactics...

(And

I have one little quibble for Lommy...

Sorry Durelin! I obviously manged to mix it up, because while I wrote that I was thinking of Rikae, since you both votes Mänwe early... Silly me.)

Durelin fails to convince me of her innocence. She seems as suspicious as TGWBS, and she now tops my suspicion list in a shared first place with him.

~*~

I'm a bit worried about silent people. Slip-under-the-radar-wolves are some of the horriblest things I know. But rather than lynching them (we have a too big wolf percent for that kind of luxuries) I'd urge and blackmail () them to speak up. (Admittedly, that isn't always very effective.)

So: Brinniel, Hookbill, Gil, speak up! I know you all have some problems (need to read, computer porblems, parental problems), but please try.

[Hookbill the Goomba]

Kitanna, it probably has more to do with the fact that I am a coward and come from a long line of cowards, its amazing I'm here at all.

I am going to try my hand at these character studies...

The right honorable Saucepan Man
He's had long experience in the game and strikes me as a guy who 'knows his onions' so to speak. As always he seems to try and keep a balance between openly accusing someone on a hunch and being logical and calculated. I liked his used of the phrase "Lembas-eating, Valar-loving surrender monkeys"
He votes for Rikae understandably from his explanation. Roa then attacks him fiercely, most probably with a large stick of some kind. I am not sure what to make of this, though (mainly because I don't really 'get' the role of the cobbler).
All in all, his posts seem very comprehensive and thorough, but something seems to rung untrue throughout and I cannot put my finger on it. Perhaps he is too good for his own good? Maybe I am reading too much into it, but he seems to be looking here and there for answers which either suggests an unsure faithful or an innocent looking for the faithfuls. As I type, it is beginning to look like the latter to me, but I shall keep an eye open.

Also, Manwe still has something odd about him. He keeps drawing attention here and there and this strikes me as a tad odd. This may be a cover, some sort of subtle use of a human, sorry, faithful shield for the other faithfuls or something. Draw all the fire to himself I suppose while not trying to be too overt. This is, of course, saying an awful lot and going on only a hunch, but its something to think about at the least.
Right, my time is up, back soon... hopefully.

[the guy who be short]

Well, here I am 1 and a bit hours earlier than I should be awake, because I'm not sure I can get onto this thread the rest of the day. Looks like an early vote from me, I'm afraid. And if I'm snappy, it's because of only 7 hours sleep, which is definitely not enough for one my age.

First, replies:

Originally Posted by nogrod

I do disagree with you on this somewhat. If we already have a terrifying number of those who can influence the vote why give them one more? And no one says we would have gotten a Faithful yesterDay anyhow, on the contrary the basic odds were against us. And it was not illogical, that was the beauty of Roa's game yesterDay: it was a perfectly possible scenario.

But let's not make an issue out of this as I do believe this breaks the lines of us innocents already...

I must make this an issue. So far, the wolves have killed nobody out of choice. Thus, voting records and past actions are the only things we have to analyse. All of yesterday was taken up with Roa, and so we have to look into people's reactions to her.

About Roa's vote: 1) She does not know who the wolves are, and so cannot help them much.
2) She would not vote for somebody she sincerely believed to be innocent (as a cobbler should) because then we would know who she thought was innocent.
3) She would not double-bluff and vote for a Faithful, because that would be dangerous for the faithful.
She would therefore be in a voting predicament, and her vote would be meaningless.

The odds were against us for getting a Faithful yesterday: they were 4/16, counting Nogrod and Rikae as known innocents. However, by voting Roa, some villagers decided it was better to have a 0 chance of getting a Faithful than a 25% chance. And of course, the sooner we get one Faithful, the sooner we can find the rest.

On the contrary, Roa's argument was illogical. If Rikae were a wolf pretending to be a Seer, the most sensible course of action would be to pretend two people were known innocents, thus gaining their trust. Why pretend to have dreamt of a cobbler? To cripple Roa? Why? Because she just happened to have accused one of them? Also, Rikae had been attacked the night before. We had only her word for this, but the chance of her lying was tiny, for that would mean the wolves had gone after somebody else AND the ranger had successfully protected this person. In addition, nobody attacked Rikae, claiming she could have been a wolf pretending to be the seer, on day 1 or early day 2. A real seer would at least have suggested this to try to throw suspicion on somebody who they would, in that scenario, be certain of being a wolf. It just didn't add up.

I've made the argument enough times. If people can't see what's in the best interests of the village, they are either misguided or Faithful.

Originally Posted by durelin

We'd be so bogged down we wouldn't know what to think. Regardless of what people said about ignoring her, I don't think anyone actually did.

I did, until the rest of the village decided to start entertaining the possibility that Roa might be telling the truth.

Originally Posted by Kath

TGWBS suggests a shortlist. This early on I'm not sure I agree.

No, he doesn't.

Originally Posted by TGWBS, post302

I advised a shortlist. However, we need more known innocents for a shortlist to be mathematically plausible and not manipulated by the Faithful.

Now that that's out the way, I can get to my analysis of Lommy.

[Thinlómien]

Brinniel - She's way too silent to my taste. I understand she wants to do some research because she does not know our wwing styles, but still... She's very careful, she manages a consistency suspecting Hookbill and her votes are bandwagoning or safe. I can very easily see a newcomer wolf doing this.... (but on the other hand, I can see an innocent newcomer doing it too). I'll be watching her.

Durelin - see my last post.

Gil-Galad - I'm slightly annoyed by his playing style, but that's what happens always... I think he's pretty genuine, though it's very difficult to say since there's so little to go on. If he's a wolf he'll be really dangerous, I'm afarid, since he manages to slip under the radar...

the guy who be short - I think I've pretty much said what I think about him. His suggestions are wolvish and so is his carefulness.

Hookbill the Goomba - It's difficult to read him. I don't like the fact that he hides behind his claimed bad reading of people and his (relative) newbieshness and that he spends most of the time either emphasising these or defending himself. This behaviour doesn't make him suspicious per se, since I don't know if he's always like that; that might be his playing style. And he doesn't give very faithfulish feel or anything. I just have the feeling that though his name is continuously brought up, he still manages to slip under the radar.

Kath - She's as she's always. Relatively silent, but helpful and contributing. Innocent or guilty. You can never decipher. She feels innocent, but one should not trust gut-feeling too much. If she's a wolf, she can be nailed after we've lynched some/one of her companions. According to my experiences, that is almost the only way to catch a kathwolf. I will take a closer look at her after we've got a wolf, but for now I'm ready to consider her innocent-ish.

Kitanna - I'm not sure if I trust her. She seems reasonable, yes. On the first Day she was mainly only agreeing and parroting. That made me wary. YesterDay and toDay she's been a bit different. But there's still something about her that does not sit right with me. I guess it might have something to do with her calm, sly manner, and I always tend to suspect her, at least a bit. If I have time toDay, I will take a closer look at her.

Lalaith - Hmmm... I dislike her NogGod-suggestions (and think them suspicious) and there's something weird about her (like the Day1 retraction which Nogrod pointed out)... But somehow the feel of her doesn't strike me as particularly suspicious. I don't know.

Legate of Amon Lanc - First Day, I thought he was very reasonable, calm and innocent-looking. Now I'm not too sure. Like someone said, he's a bit too quick to agree. What's funny is that while Rune became less suspicious about him after the long post yesterDay, I became more so. Somehow, it just didn't sit right with me. Yet there is some innocentishness in him too... A tough one.

Mänwe - I'm inclined to think he's innocent. Like Rune said, he's being too weird and making far too much mess to be a wolf.

Mithalwen - Another tough one. She feels innocent, but less than the last time I played with her. She's concentarting on things an innocent wouldn't maybe concentrate on (like the Roa-SPM-Nogrod triangle on Day1), but her consistence in demanding to lynch someone else than Roa (which I could very well understand) speaks for her innocence.

Nogrod - Known innocent.

Rune Son of Bjarne - I always tend to sympathise with him, and I don't know why. But in this game my initial feeling towards him has been less sympathic. Is my subconscious right? Is there something wrong with Rune? Might be. His Legate-case and his votes have been quite worriesome... But on the other hand, he has been very reasonable at times, and innocently reasonable, if you ask me.

The Saucepan Man - How much ever you others have debated about him, he has managed to slip under my radar. I have not formed a proper picture of him yet. I can't see anything that especially speaks for his innocence, nor anything that speaks for his guilt. He's reasonable and has good points, but that's what he does as a wolf as well.

Thinlómien - Obviously innocent.

~*~

While writing this, I realised my opinions about most people were "I don't know" or "a tough one" or "could be evil or good"... Well, at least I learned I need more reread and more thinking. But it troubles me that I can't get a proper grasp on people.

EDIT: xed with Hookbill and TGWBS... avoided triple posting

[Thinlómien]

TGWBS's obvious grumpiness about people deciding to lynch Roa instead of trying to get a wolf slightly lessens my suspicions of him...

[the guy who be short]

Post 42 - Very neutral. She is the first person to cast suspicion on Rikae, I believe. If she were a Faithful, it would be a good chance to jump on a suspicious looking innocent.

Post 50 - Nothing

Post 54 - Votes Rikae.

Post 178 - Again, much neutrality, with a few mild suspicions.

Post 180 - Casts suspicion on Nogrod. Very neutrally, of course.

Post 182 - Voices slight suspicion of Hookbill.

Post 183 - Huge voting record. She then analyses these a little, in very weak language. "Slightly uneasy," "I don't know why," etc.

Post 185 - After Rikae has revealed roles, says she half-jokingly almost posted that Roa might be the cobbler. Perhaps a wolf who figured out the cobbler?

Post 187 - Attacks my idea of using Nogrod and Rikae as a platform. In her strongest words yet, attacks me as a potential wolf. As it is, my ideas are logical. Anything anybody says could be wolvish, including me and Lommy. However, nothing Nogrod says can be wolvish. It's therefore more sensible to heed Nogrod - so the wolves are forced to vote according to innocent logic - than to allow the wolves free reign.

Post 189 - Nothing.

Post 190 - Votes for me. Worries about durelin and Kitanna.

Post 321 - Attacks the idea of using Nogrod again. The point is not that his ideas are better or based on more knowledge, but that his ideas are not wolvish. If everybody votes according to them, they have to vote for somebody based on the reasoning of an innocent. They are not weird tactics! They make sense.

Post 322 - I think it's reasonable to assume that what Roa says is the opposite of what she means. Particularly, when she attacks somebody, I would say she definitely avoided attacking wolves.

There's not as much here pointing to wolvishness as I'd like there to be, if I'm perfectly honest. Perhaps my suspicion of Lommy was merely a knee-jerk reaction to her voting for me and attacking my idea of using known innocents.

I suppose the thing that disconcerts me most about Lommy is her neutrality and her carefulness not to accuse or defend anybody strongly (except me, Lal and durelin). Having no opinions about people is a cop-out. But I do not genuinely believe she is Faithful (though she may be) and so I cannot vote for her now, as I anticipated doing.

It is a shame I have no time today to analyse the people voting for Roa. I am certain now that I will find some Faithful among them. I'd only really trust Mith, other than me, to do this, and she probably wont have enough time either.

Looks like a no-vote from me today. Bye.

[Thinlómien]

Day 1
#23 Defends Glirdan and his infamous first post by saying that he's always like that, says most of her points have been already brought up by others.
#30 Does not understand Mänwe's logic about grouping her, Roa, SPM and Nogrod. Demands an explanation.
#33 Criticises Mänwe for refusing to explain his actions. Corrects Mänwe's conception on what she said about Glirdan.
#90 Pops up and says that Rikae's vote caught her attention.
#96 Understands Rikae's vote but is unsure about what to think of it. Thinks Mänwe less suspicious. Points out that no one jumped against Gil's first post (as in comparison to the fuss about Glirdan's similar first post). Does not understand the "Mänwe is harsh"-thing. Is suspicious of Garin's vote and vote-switch and votes him.
Comments: I don't like her attitude towards Mänwe. Or let's phrase it diffrently: if Mänwe's a wolf, Kitanna is probably too. Not particularly suspicious, but definitely not too innocentish either. Also, that Garin-vote is quite an easy one. It's always to reason a vote against Garin, and I think Kitanna knows that.

Day2
#245 Again says that all she had to say is already said by others. (But obvioulsy not all really, since she continues.) Speculates about the cobbler-seer thing. "A lot of damage can be done the longer a cobbler is kept alive." Is not sure if believes Rikae's claim anymore, since she told us Roa's the cobbler, but advices us not to kill her. "I realize how bad this is for me to even dare to say this, but if Rikae is the seer she is giving us horrible advice." Repeats that Roa-cobbler should be eliminated. Says she thinks Roa probably is the cobbler, is confused about this. "I also know I've put myself in a dangerous spot." Again warns about letting Cobbler-Roa live.
No vote
Comments: I don't like her repeating that everything she has thought about has already been said. I also don't like her repeating manner. In that sole post, she says at least three times that Roa the cobbler must be eliminated. I don't like her two (2) "I'm in danger because I said this"-statements in the same post.

Day3
#320 Says she's decided to take a closer look at Hookbill, slightly analyses him, reaches the conclusion that he might be trying to cover his tracks and that she's unsure about him.
Comments: Hookbill? A good suspect-pick for a wolf, no doubt. He's been suspected a bit every now and then (so no one's going to says she's talking nonsense), but the case probably won't gather enough support for him to get lynched. But, on the other hand, there might really be something wrong with that Goomba-guy...

Overall conclusions: Kitanna is suspicious, but doesn't scream a wolf. I might vote her toDay. I still suspect Durelin and TGWBS more than her.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Nogrod, despite referring frequently to your suspicions of me, you have never really explained this "Spm theory".

Okay I just have this much time between the lessons and I have thought I should tell you all why I have suspected Spm from Day1 onwards. You should consider whether it has any merit or not. I myself am a little disturbed by it to be honest, mainly because if we make a mistake with SPaM it would be about the worst one we could do...

So. I suspected Spm firstly and foremostly because he seemed to be playing in about exactly the same fashion I would have played if I were a faithful and knew him to be an innocent. We tend to think quite alike many times (surely not always) and share many views about playing this game. And I guess we both would like to get the other one lynched if we were werecreatures. And It would be important to make it in sportman-fashion: no Night kill for the other but getting the other lynched. Definitively.

So what do I see when he enters the game? He starts spreading some mild suggestions that I (and Roa) are to be suspected and seems to be deliberately building small mountains out of almost nonexistent molehills, indeed twisting some of my posting to suit his suspicions.

What's wrong with that? Making a fabricated case - a case in which you don't even believe yourself - is something the werecreatures do (they have to) but which wise villagers avoid doing. I mean, I think I could make pretty damning analyses by adding a few small twists from quite many of the villagers here. But what if someone believes them or the wolves start carrying them? That's no good for us. It's playing to the hands of the baddies. Thence a villager doesn't overstretch his points or make suspicions from nothing / twist things to make suspicions.

As I said, were I a Faithful in this game and knew Spm was not I would have done the things he has done so far. I mean all the rest too: after he would have disagreed with my points I would have stayed with my case and said it is as good an interpretation than which he offers and thence tried to start looking more constructive, focusing on other areas; and had I had Roa on me like he had, I would probably had tried to stay calm like he did etc.

One minor detail to add. I find it somewhat odd that Spm needs to remind us a few times that he's a "serial voter-for-gifteds", humorously to be sure (how else?) and from the very beginning on. Kind of downplaying any later incidents where he has been a major part in lynching innocents / gifteds? I don't know. Sounds unimportant (=might be just joking), but sometimes the Devil does live in the details.

So I'm a bit troubled with this as I admit it ain't much for Day3 suspicion. Then again I haven't yet had time to read any closer his latest contributions toDay. So I will come back to Spm later, but I'm going to go for some others first as I would love to have better cases...

[Mithalwen]

Hi I am here but haven't read through properly yet ..... still kicking myself for not seeing (though Roa clearly did, ) that lynching the doomed Glirdan would have been the best option for the village last night.

[Durelin]

Originally Posted by Lommy

I don't think anyone else than the faithfuls are delighted to have the seer not dreamed about even one wolf before she dies. I mean, her attitude seems too joyful... While it's a good thing that the cobbler's nailed, Durelin seems a bit overjoyed... maybe because she and her companions are in no danger of being dreamed about anymore?

Okay, I hate *defensive* posts as much as the next person, but I have to respond to this. Lommy, hon, you've been the Seer before. So you know how awesome it is to get one of the baddies that early on. And I could not imagine being the Seer with that large of a crowd to sift through at the start! Rikae was outed on Day 1...that's only two dreams. So I went into Day 2 with the belief that we'd simply have two ousted innocents, who'd get systematically killed at Night (though the Ranger would have helped with that, I suppose). To me, getting a baddy of any sort seems better, though I guess that is debatable. There would have been jumping up and down involved if she had managed to dream of a wolf. I would likely have tackled her.

Originally Posted by SPM

Possibly, therefore, a Faithful Durelin was testing the waters for a possible lynch campaign against Manwe.

Actually it was Innocent Durelin seeing if she could get people to wake up a bit. I thought I'd get more negative reaction out of that vote then, rather than two days later.

Alright, school time...*whines about her Hamlet test as she wanders out*

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

So what do I see when he enters the game? He starts spreading some mild suggestions that I (and Roa) are to be suspected and seems to be deliberately building small mountains out of almost nonexistent molehills, indeed twisting some of my posting to suit his suspicions.

I understood this part of the case, but was unclear on the specifics. Looking back, I see that you outlined your case in post #82. Since I didn’t get a chance to respond to your points then, I will do so now.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

It looks like he is grasping at every straw he can twist.

I was certainly grasping at straws. Isn’t that what people do on Day 1? Given that there is so little to go on, anything slightly suspicious can get our alarm bells ringing. But I wasn’t twisting. I genuinely thought that you looked suspicious (particularly your reaction to my “bearting” comment), and so outlined those suspicions.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Then he goes on adding that remarkable suspicion that Kath and I are up to no good as we had voiced some optimism because of the basic setting of the game.

Cheery, optimistic statements like that always tweak my “suspicion radar“. Another example is Durelin’s joyful reaction toDay to the outcome of the Rikae/Roa situation.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I mean what is this? How does this relate to anything? How do people act in a state of "false security" and what follows from that? Sorry but I just don't get this. If on the other hand SPaM is only trying to come up with anything someone might bite, then it would be more understandable.

I would not underestimate the importance of psychology in Werewolf. An optimistic statement by an influential player that the odds are in our favour can have a psychological effect on the minds of others and so invite carelessness. It looked to me like a seemingly innocent-looking opening comment that might have malign purpose behind it.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

So long as the lynch is not bent towards one of them it's pretty much the same to the were-faithfuls who is lynched. Why risk making an open campaign? But only if there is something like a big fish to be lynched.

My theory concerning those outlining early suspicions of Manwe and Glirdan was (and remains, with regard to Manwe) that some of the Faithful may have been “testing the waters” to see if a lynch campaign might be orchestrated. As I have said, concerning Manwe, I actually find those who outlined suspicions and then withdrew from them to be, on reflection, of greater concern than those who actually placed early votes for him.

One final point. You may be right that a Faithful was trying to stir suspicions of you in an attempt to take out an influential innocent, but I would expect them to do so subtly. Lommy’s comments in posts #42, #178 and #180 might be worth considering in this regard.

And now I will get on with my analysis of the Day 2 votes.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by the guy who be short

It is a shame I have no time today to analyse the people voting for Roa. I am certain now that I will find some Faithful among them. I'd only really trust Mith, other than me, to do this, and she probably wont have enough time either.

Looks like a no-vote from me today. Bye.

I might ... but not til a bit later ... certainly it was in their interests to have her dead since she was effectiely neutralised

Also it may be worth looking at Roa's analysis - with "eyes wide open". Even as a wolf in previous games her summaries were accurate, just "slanted". I have a theory that it is very hard for people to do things deliberately badly which they normally do well. So I suggest that Roa's facts willprobably be right but the devil will be in the detail ie the interpretation or what she has omitted. And remembering that she was working on what she had read rather than the certainty she would have had as a faithful.

[Mithalwen]

I stand by my decision to try and "save Roa". Roa was certainly NOT a wolf. Anyone else MIGHT have been a wolf. If you have a chance against a certain failure why is it so suspicious to choose the chance. As I say my only regret was not recognising the significance of the Glirdan situation til too late.

I have had a suspicion of SpM since day 1 since he was one of those who got hung up on my first post.. but as I say suspecting Sauce is fairly habitual for me (though sometimes justified )

I don't intend to justify myself further. I am innocent and would rather use my time to look at the rest of you.

[Thinlómien]

1)

Originally Posted by Mith

lynching the doomed Glirdan would have been the best option for the village last night.

I fail to see the logic here. Glirdan was doomed to die, yes. But the village lynches' purpose is to make the wolves extinct, right? Lynching an innocent doomed to die surely does not help to achieve that. I agree with you that lynching Roa yesterday was not the best cause, but, like TGWBS, I think the lynch should have been used to try to eliminate a wolf.

2) Durelin, your defense is understandable, but I think it's just about the interpretation and the interpretator were you really overjoyed or just being happy since the seer was doing relatively well. So maybe we should leave the thing be. I think the way I do, and you the way you do. Of course, you're the one who knows the truth, but I can't take your word for it.

3)

Originally Posted by Sauce

You may be right that a Faithful was trying to stir suspicions of you in an attempt to take out an influential innocent, but I would expect them to do so subtly. Lommy’s comments in posts #42, #178 and #180 might be worth considering in this regard.

Sauce, do you seriously think that I, of all people in this world, would imagine that such argumentative power as Nogrod can be brought down with a few quick remarks?

[The Saucepan Man]

I am not sure how much help this is going to be, given the way that the Day went, but there might be something here.

Here's the voting record again, for ease of reference:

Gil-Galad: ++SpM (SpM 1)
Lommy: ++TGWBS (SpM 1, TGWBS 1)
Brinniel: ++Legate (SpM 1, TGWBS 1, Legate 1)
SpM: ++Roa (SpM 1, TGWBS 1, Legate 1, Roa 1)
Lalaith: ++Roa (SpM 1, TGWBS 1, Legate 1, Roa 2)
Rune: ++Legate (SpM 1, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 2)
Kath: ++Roa (SpM 1, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 3)
Roa: ++Roa (SpM 1, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 4)
Mithalwen: ++SpM (SpM 2, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 4)
TGWBS: ++Brinniel (SpM 2, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 4, Brinniel 1)
Roa: --Roa, ++SpM (SpM 3, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 3, Brinniel 1)
Durelin: ++Roa (SpM 3, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 4, Brinniel 1)
Manwe ++Roa (SpM 3, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 5, Brinniel 1)
Legate: ++Roa (SpM 3, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 6, Brinniel 1)
Rikae: ++Mithalwen (SpM 3, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 6, Brinniel 1, Mithalwen 1)
Nogrod: ++Roa (SpM 3, TGWBS 1, Legate 2, Roa 7, Brinniel 1, Mithalwen 1)
Rikae: --Mithalwen, ++Legate (SpM 3, TGWBS 1, Legate 3, Roa 7, Brinniel 1)

Did not vote: Glirdan, Hookbill, Kitanna

Roa voters: SpM, Lalaith, Kath, Roa (retracted), Durelin, Manwe, Legate, Nogrod

As I have said, I believe that lynching Roa was our best option for the Day. I still don't understand the reasoning that says it is better to vote for someone who is something like 75% likely to be innocent, when a vote can be cast for someone who is 99.9% likely to be the Cobbler. Maybe it is just my conservative nature ...

Incidentally, Mith, the possibility of lynching Glirdy did not occur to me either, but wasn’t there still a possibility that he would be given a reprieve?

That said, given the numbers, it is extremely unlikely that there were no Faithfuls among those that voted for Roa. Despite contributing to the loss of their Cobbler, a vote for Roa would have been a “safe” vote. It was always a likely outcome, so I would expect them to have placed their votes relatively early, where they could hope to gain some credit, but could still retract if necessary. In this regard, the votes of Lalaith and Kath look to me to be the most likely Faithful-on-Cobbler votes. Durelin’s vote is also a possibility.

SpM voters: Gil-Galad, Roa, Mithalwen

Well, I don’t like Gil’s reasoning (such as it is), but there’s not much more to say on his vote other than that. Gil has said precious little to judge him by, but he always plays like that, guilty or innocent. I am not sure what to do about him. On the one hand, I rather agree with whoever said that our situation is rather too precarious to go off on a “lynch the silent ones” campaign. On the other hand, there is something like a 1 in 4 chance that he’s a Faithful.

As I indicated earlier, I am wary of Mith’s attempts to prevent Roa’s lynching and I don’t like the reasons she put forward for me being the alternative (the “quibble” and my vote for Roa). That said, I do think that she was being far more obvious in trying to save Roa than I would expect a Faithful would be.

Legate voters: Brinniel, Rune, Rikae

Of those who did not vote for Roa, I find those who were not overtly pushing for her to be saved the more suspicious. I don’t fully understand the suspicion of Legate, as the evidence seems a bit thin. It seems to amount to no more than his intervention in the Hookbill/Brinniel episode (which I think really amounted to much fuss and bother over nothing) and the fact that he has been “reasonable“. Brinniel also didn’t like the fact that Legate found her suspicious, and thought it odd? Why? It is the most natural thing in the world, in a game of Werewolf, to be found suspicious, even when innocent. It happens to us all!

Both Brinniel and Rune appear to have thought it more likely than not that Roa was lying, and yet voted for someone who might be guilty or might be innocent, seemingly on very little evidence. I am fairly sure that one of these two is a Faithful. Possibly, they both are, given that Rune has said on a number of occasions that he finds Brinniel suspicious, but has never voted for her. Possibly, Legate and one of these two are Faithfuls, since, with Roa the most likely to be lynched, this would have been a good time for a Faithful-on-Faithful vote. I am inclined, at present, to think Legate innocent, though.

Others:

Lommy for TGWBS - Thin grounds (no pun intended ). TGWBS had suggested taking account of the fact that Nogrod and Rikae were known (or almost certain, in Rikae’s case) innocents, and that their thoughts were therefore the only ones (other than our own) we could be sure were untainted. That seems to be an entirely reasonable proposition to me, and yet she voted yesterDay on the basis of it. That and the fact that she found TGWBS was being “careful“, a conveniently vague and unsubstantiated statement. Also, she appears to have accepted that Roa was the Cobbler, yet gave no thought to voting for her.

TGWBS for Brinniel - I don’t like the way that TGWBS was trying to persuade the village not to vote for Roa, and in a more subtle manner than Mith. Yet, it was still a risky strategy for a Faithful. His vote for Brinniel is reasoned on both he and Rikae finding her suspicious. Not sure, but I don’t find anything overly suspicious about this vote, other than the fact that it was not for Roa.

I agree with Mith that looking at Roa’s analyses with “eyes wide open” might well be productive, and I am wary of those who have suggested otherwise. I will try to do so later. TGWBS’ simple “reverse psychology” approach is just that - too simple. However, I do believe that she thought Nogrod to be a Faithful and me to be an innocent (so she got one thing right ). Other than that, I suspect that she that she is unlikely to have wanted to draw much attention to any she thought were Faithfuls.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Lommy

Sauce, do you seriously think that I, of all people in this world, would imagine that such argumentative power as Nogrod can be brought down with a few quick remarks?

No, but I can imagine you indulging in a little stirring ...

[The Saucepan Man]

I have attempted to collate my somewhat jumbled thoughts on the voting into some kind of coherent order. So, here is my current thinking, based mainly upon my analysis of the voting:

Suspicious
Lalaith - the mistress of “safe votes”
Durelin - for some curious voting on Day 1 and a possible “safe” Roa vote on Day 2
Rune - for possibly testing the water on Manwe and a suspicious Day 2 vote
Brinniel - also for that Day 2 vote, and for seemingly trying to say little controversial
Lommy - for a suspicious Day 2 vote

Somewhat suspicious
TGWBS - for urging the village not to vote for Roa
Kitanna - for possibly testing the water on Manwe and also seemingly avoiding controversy

No idea
Kath
Gil-Galad
Hookbill

Inclined to think innocent
Manwe - for reasons previously stated
Legate - I tend to think that reasonableness is just that, without more
Mithalwen - her approach to the Roa issue looks to be too bold for her

Innocent
Nogrod

This is really just based on the voting and general impressions, and there’s a lot more that I want to look at before I draw any firm conclusions.

[Brinniel]

Indeed, I admit I am a quiet one, but as I am a newcomer you all must learn that this is simply my style....as an innocent of course.

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

Brinniel also didn’t like the fact that Legate found her suspicious, and thought it odd? Why? It is the most natural thing in the world, in a game of Werewolf, to be found suspicious, even when innocent. It happens to us all!

Hmm...I'm not sure where you get this impression. After Legate's first suspicion of me, on post 49 I merely clarified what I said. I never showed any sign I was upset...I just defended myself as anyone would.

Anyways, I was thinking (perhaps in my newbie way) that it would become easier to pick out the Faithful as the Days go by, but now it is only beginning to seem even more difficult. Those I feel most suspicious of aren't posting toDay as much as I would like, and it's slightly frustrating. I am hopping on a plane today, so I must make my vote within the hour, and I have no idea whom to pick just yet...

I wish I could be around for the exciting last few hours, but unfortunately that just cannot be. So if anyone has more to say...say it now!

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Brinniel

Hmm...I'm not sure where you get this impression. After Legate's first suspicion of me, on post 49 I merely clarified what I said. I never showed any sign I was upset...I just defended myself as anyone would.

I had in mind this comment in #207:

Originally Posted by Brinniel

And the more and more I am becoming suspicious of Legate. From his last post, he seems to think no one is suspicious and I find that a bit odd.

... but I misread it. Apologies.

It doesn't really change my assessment, though.

[Brinniel]

Originally Posted by Rune

I am starting to belive Mänwe innocent. . .the more I think about it the more it makes sence. I mean, I have hardly ever witnessed a wolf act downright weird or stand out like Garin did, mostly when people get in the spot like in that fashion they get lynched and are odros. The wolves I only spot on small things and therefor I shall focus on these things rahter than people that stands out like Mänwe.

I find it odd that though Rune doesn't think those who stand out like Garin are Faithfuls, he still voted for him.

Originally Posted by Rune

Even now when all evidence points towards her being the cobbler she mannage to put doubts in my mind.

Did Roa really making you doubt Rikae's word, or are you just saying that?

Even though I didn't vote for Roa, I still believed she was the cobbler. But it was a Faithful I wanted to lynch! Rune's statement could easily come from a Faithful who wants to trick innocents into doubting Rikae as well. Of course, as discussed, he was not the only one to place doubts...

Rune seems to be full of uncertainty. He claims in post 319 he has poor judgement, and perhaps as a Faithful, this is what he would want us to think. I am definitely beginning to question him more and more...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, let's move in the day. First, to Nogrod's first posts and the discussion following: I think it is not good to consider only a "shortlist", as Lalaith and tgwbs adviced. But Nogrod could be of help and we'd do best to "judge" our own thoughts or suspicions in the light of the one innocent's thoughts. Because, if you move your thoughts through the points of Nogrod and re-think them, it is likely you find something that might correct your thoughts. When, of course, it's everyone's job to do so for himself. But if all the villagers do that, I think it might help to shrug off the tangles of misleading hints of the Faithfuls.

One first thought about Mithalwen:

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

(Mithalwen)'s concentarting on things an innocent wouldn't maybe concentrate on (like the Roa-SPM-Nogrod triangle on Day1), but her consistence in demanding to lynch someone else than Roa (which I could very well understand) speaks for her innocence.

Actually, I don't think this would make her innocent. I think it might as well either have served her to keep Roa alive to help the Faithfuls vote (less likely), or served her to hide behind "being different" (under the candle is the least light, or if this proverb exists in English).

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

We can kill Roa anytime , we need dead wolves.... we would be better off lynching a non participant.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I stand by my decision to try and "save Roa". Roa was certainly NOT a wolf. Anyone else MIGHT have been a wolf. If you have a chance against a certain failure why is it so suspicious to choose the chance.

There is a third thought, however, that is convincing us to quickly change our votes from Roa to someone else - and trying to pick someone else instead of Roa (even more in such a rush) might mean picking an innocent as well, and if we picked an innocent, it would have been a triple-kill for the wolves.
It is something I have to think more of, since Mithalwen has been already debated at start, where I didn't find her suspicious. This time it seems to me, however, something different.

Originally Posted by the Saucepan Man

Both Brinniel and Rune appear to have thought it more likely than not that Roa was lying, and yet voted for someone who might be guilty or might be innocent, seemingly on very little evidence. I am fairly sure that one of these two is a Faithful. Possibly, they both are, given that Rune has said on a number of occasions that he finds Brinniel suspicious, but has never voted for her. Possibly, Legate and one of these two are Faithfuls, since, with Roa the most likely to be lynched, this would have been a good time for a Faithful-on-Faithful vote.

The last can be dropped, SpM, I am really not a Faithful. But after considering this idea, it occurs to me it might have something in it. Because: unless the Faithful completely missed this voting, then it is three innocent going against themselves. But, if one of us three were to be a Faithful, then I'd be most suspicious about Brinniel. The main point is that in her posts she generally just throws a suspicion, or hints something which might then be used to rouse suspicion, and that's mostly all. If she were a Faithful, it would indeed serve its purpose.

EDIT: Cross-posted with the Saucepan Man and Brinniel.

[Nogrod]

I would like to remind us all of the following...

We have two conflicting opinions of known innocents on the matter of whether it is/was good to lynch a known Cobbler yesterDay or not. Rikae thought it a terrible idea and I thought it good for the village.

I would advise you not to make too much of an issue of it as we already know that innocents can disagree on the matter. If someone will go looking at the Faithfuls solely or mainly on the basis of whether someone wished Roa to be lynched or not we'll bog down in an argument that already seems to divide innocents. And that suits the Faithfuls more than well.

And I would find it quite incredible indeed that all of our wolves would be so much better at arriving to the conclusion for what was best for them & trying to make it happen that way in action yesterDay... No way.

-------
Okay. I've read all there has been toDay. I need to give it some thought and probably soon give the computer to Lommy and go making us some dinner. I'll try to post a few small thoughts next. I'll come around with some more extensive contributions a bit later.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I would advise you not to make too much of an issue of it as we already know that innocents can disagree on the matter.

But Nogrod, it is rather difficult to draw any kind of a conclusion from the Day 2 votes without forming a view on this issue. Perhaps that was Roa's genius ...

I have to take into account that I think it more in the Faithful's interests to try to save Roa when looking at those votes. Then again, the voting record is not the be all and end all.

[Brinniel]

The main point is that in her posts she generally just throws a suspicion, or hints something which might then be used to rouse suspicion, and that's mostly all.

Hmm...am I doing that? Perhaps... Well, I've never been a very good debator so perhaps throwing out suspicions is my best way to argue. I guess I'm not very good at this...

But to be very honest, all the suspicions I've thrown out so far are suspicions that I truly believe in. As I said before, I tend to go off hunches, which as I realize, can really hurt me here.

[Brinniel]

Okay, as much as I hate to, I've really got to make my vote now, or I'll miss my plane!

If any of my comments/votes seem odd or safe or whatever, most likely it's because I'm rushed and not exactly thinking clearly. Luckily, the end of my crazy week ends toDay, so if you want a better judge in character, I suggest keeping me around another day.

So here's my vote:

++Rune

For reasons I've stated earlier. Legate and Hookbill still don't look innocent, but today they're looking less suspicious, and Rune is looking more so.

Good luck to you all! I sure hope we actually catch a Faithful today. And I'll be back toMorrow, as long as I'm still alive...

[Lalaith]

It was always a likely outcome, so I would expect them to have placed their votes relatively early, where they could hope to gain some credit, but could still retract if necessary. In this regard, the votes of Lalaith and Kath look to me to be the most likely Faithful-on-Cobbler votes. Durelin’s vote is also a possibility.

And, my dear Saucie, you yourself fall very neatly into this category. You should really have, in the cause of fairness, pointed this out yourself.

Oh and I did not advise a Nogrod-led lynching or shortlist. I said we should discuss the possibility and/or other uses of a known innocent.
More to come in a minute when I have read the thread more thoroughly.

[the guy who be short]

I have found literally five minutes online.

So: I think SpM is right when he says we should looks at those who were neither strongly against or strongly for lynching Roa. And so:

++BRINNIEL

I must also add that I do not understand mith at all. I thought her Faithful to start with, then innocent for trying not to lynch Roa, now Faithful again for the Glirdan comment. How would that help us? It goes against the rationale she gave for opposing voting for Roa.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

I am growing more suspicouse of Lommy, especially her attack Lalaiths "alternative" tactics I don't like. First of all I find it a reasonable tactic to sugest and think it is more likely than not to be sugested by an innocent. Secondly I find it troublesome to be susupicouse of people meerly because they have differnet and sometimes crazy approaches to finding wolves, by doing so you are also making it easier for wolves to hide and therefor should be a subject to your own suspicion!

If we scare people away from coming up with new ideas then the game will become more static and predictable and therefor much easier to play for the wolves.

I know this is a bit bombastic, but I am just trying to make a point.

Brinniel Said:

I find it odd that though Rune doesn't think those who stand out like Garin are Faithfuls, he still voted for him.

Did Roa really making you doubt Rikae's word, or are you just saying that?

Even though I didn't vote for Roa, I still believed she was the cobbler. But it was a Faithful I wanted to lynch! Rune's statement could easily come from a Faithful who wants to trick innocents into doubting Rikae as well. Of course, as discussed, he was not the only one to place doubts...

Rune seems to be full of uncertainty. He claims in post 319 he has poor judgement, and perhaps as a Faithful, this is what he would want us to think. I am definitely beginning to question him more and more...

Today 05:02 PM

If you read my post you will find that I say that I am starting to find Mänwe less suspicoise, this is to say that it is a realisation I have just made and therfor was not a part of my thought process when I voted for Garin.

Well, I was pretty sure that Rikae was the one telling the truth, but Roa's first responses did put a bit of doubt in my mind.

I find some of you suspicion a bit silly, it might be because you have not played with me before, but I am always very unsure about what to do in large parts of the game. Normaly I do not retaliate to suspicion by suspecting back, but I am very tempted right now.

another thing about Lommy. . .I found it weird how she reacted to Miths statement about it would have been better to kill Glirdan. Again this could be because I agree with Mith.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Lommy

I think no one should start toDay what some started yesterday: trying to find clues from Roa's posts. It's just useless. She's cunning enough to make the posts misleading and as she had no real information, the analyser would be wasting his/her time.

Except if s/he was a faithful? I can't see anyone else having a motive to analyse Roa's posts. A faithful could use this to sway the discussion, confuse the village and to look helpful.

Although Spm had pretty strong opinions to the contrary I think Lommy makes sense here. I've played with Roa enough to know beforehand that there is no straight way to interpret her posting and the only ones who could clearly benefit from analysing them and making a convincing-looking case from there would be ones who knew how things are aka the Faithfuls. At least I will be quite sceptical with the finds anyone comes by from them.

Just note the following f.ex.:

Originally Posted by SPaMman

However, I do believe that she (Roa) thought Nogrod to be a Faithful and me to be an innocent

Funny. I had just the oppositie impression... and I even think I would have grounds for it based on general Cobblery and some knowledge of the ways Roa works...

Originally Posted by SPaMman

But Nogrod, it is rather difficult to draw any kind of a conclusion from the Day 2 votes without forming a view on this issue. Perhaps that was Roa's genius ...

I know and agree with Roa playing well yesterDay... But what I basically meant with my comment was that we should not focus in a way that "because X wished to lynch Roa" (or didn't wish to), s/he must be suspicious.

F.ex. what you said about there probably being wolves in the group of Roa-voters yesterDay sounds perfectly legitimate approach to me. Indeed there are only 6 unknown Roa-voters and it wouldn't be too far fetched to suppose that we just might have a chance of having two of the Faithfuls there and surely at least one.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by the guy who be short

So: I think SpM is right when he says we should looks at those who were neither strongly against or strongly for lynching Roa.

I do also agree. Detachement as I discussed on Day1. Especially those who made no comments on the burning issue but just left their votes safely ducking the heat...

But now really I'm off to do some cooking. Back later.

[Kitanna]

The power or the internet around here may or may not shut down today due to blizzards. So, I am going to vote now just in case everything shuts down and I can't get back on. Though I will be on as long as I can rereading the thread, therefore my vote may well change before days ends.

++ Hookbill

I don't like how he reinforces his bad judge of character and how he hides behind this mask of newbieness. I could understand one or two posts from Day 1, but in most of his posts he takes the time to remind us he doesn't read people too well. I feel he is trying to get us to look away from him because of this. Playing a "weak" faithful, if you will. Coming into the village, looking uncertain, flying under everyone's radar. I'm very interested to see how he votes today.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

And, my dear Saucie, you yourself fall very neatly into this category. You should really have, in the cause of fairness, pointed this out yourself.

I am well aware of that, and should have thought that it was perfectly obvious from the voting chart. It's hardly helpful for me to analyse my own votes. I shall leave that to others to do.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

At least I will be quite sceptical with the finds anyone comes by from them.

I am simply suggesting that there may be something useful there. I am not suggesting that they are likely to form the basis of a case. Since Roa has already been "outed" by the time I arrived on Day 2, I never really read them in any great detail, merely skimmed. Still, I am not sure that I will have much of a chance toDay, as I am more focussed currently on looking at what those still with us have said.

Originally Posted by Roa

Funny. I had just the oppositie impression... and I even think I would have grounds for it based on general Cobblery and some knowledge of the ways Roa works...

I would find it quite surprising for Roa to go quite so aggressively against one she thought to be a Faithful, unless she planned on dying quite early on (the double-bluff maneuvre). She could not know that Rikae would dream of her. But let's agree to disagree and leave it at that for now. I certainly agree that Roa's thoughts, even if we could be sure of them, would by no means by decisive.

[Thinlómien]

I remember I've argued about this kind of matters with Sauce before... It just seems he never gets my point (or then he's always deliberatedly twisting my words, but why would he, since he's not always guilty).

Originally Posted by Sauce

TGWBS had suggested taking account of the fact that Nogrod and Rikae were known (or almost certain, in Rikae’s case) innocents, and that their thoughts were therefore the only ones (other than our own) we could be sure were untainted. That seems to be an entirely reasonable proposition to me, and yet she voted yesterDay on the basis of it.

I was not agaisnt heeding Nogrod's and Rikae's advice, on the contrary. I was only against them nominating the lynch candidates or people taking their word for the absolute truth.

Originally Posted by SPM

she appears to have accepted that Roa was the Cobbler, yet gave no thought to voting for her.

I did give it thought, but didn't write about it. Mostly because I didn't really ponder about it, but thought it's obviously a better option at this phase to try to lynch a wolf than to lynch a cobbler. There is and has been a major disagreement about this here. I will speak no more of it. It has already taken too much of our concentration away from finding faithfuls. There's no use to speculate about it anymore since there was only one cobbler in this game and she's dead.

Originally Posted by SPAM

No, but I can imagine you indulging in a little stirring ...

And you can't imagine me indulging in a "little stirring" when innocent? Seriously, I was not a faithful indulging in such, neither an innocent indulging in such. I was an innocent pointing out weird things.

Sauce, reading your posts I get the impression that every single vote yesterDay was suspicious in your opinion. You accuse those who voted Roa and those who didn't. While it's good to question and suspect people in werewolf, a total paranoia never helps, especially when it comes from a person who is capable of argumenting the village upside down.

Originally Posted by Roa
Funny. I had just the oppositie impression... and I even think I would have grounds for it based on general Cobblery and some knowledge of the ways Roa works...

Teehee! Freudian slip.

~*~

I find Brinn's points about Rune very reasonable. This kind of eases my suspicions of her.

Originally Posted by Rune

Secondly I find it troublesome to be susupicouse of people meerly because they have differnet and sometimes crazy approaches to finding wolves,

I have nothing against people using their own strategies to find wolves... (Or wait, I do have, but this is not about that anyway... ) Why I'm genrally very against the tactic(s) suggested by TGWBS and Lalaith that I disagree with is that they are not merely crazy individual wolf-spotting tactics, but crazy lynching strategies that concern all of us and need co-operation and thus are far more problematic.

~*~

I have a nagging feeling that I might be suspecting people only/mostly because I disagree with them. It really bothers me. I mean, SPM has striked me as very suspicious toDay and I certainly disagree with him about many matters...

TGWBS might fall to this category too, but I'm not ready to discount his suspiciousness because of our disagreements. I think he acts like a faithful would or what would be wise for a faithful. But he tends to have these strong tactics-suggestions (and I tend to disagree with them), but, like I've said before, usually as an ordo he's more ruthless. He's been uncharacteristically careful and cool-headed... My reason shouts "lynch him!" but in some level my gut-feelings say he might be innocent after all. *sigh* Damn this werewolf.

~*~

I'm very confused about this all. I wish I had a clearer picture about this. My suspicions are in all directions in varying degrees, (but I'm not very confident about any of them).

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Lommy

I was not agaisnt heeding Nogrod's and Rikae's advice, on the contrary. I was only against them nominating the lynch candidates or people taking their word for the absolute truth.

It seems to me that the former is little different than TGWBS was suggesting. So you see, you really don't have any disagreement with him, after all.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Sauce, reading your posts I get the impression that every single vote yesterDay was suspicious in your opinion.

Not really. I was commenting on the votes as I saw them. You can see from my subsequent list where these thoughts led me.

Originally Posted by Lommy

You accuse those who voted Roa and those who didn't.

Yes, I believe that at least one, quite possibly two, Faithfuls voted for Roa and that the remainder didn't. It seems to me very unlikely indeed that the Faithfuls were all either in one "camp" or the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roa
Funny. I had just the oppositie impression... and I even think I would have grounds for it based on general Cobblery and some knowledge of the ways Roa works...

Teehee! Freudian slip.

Not sure I understand this. Wasn't it Nogrod who said that?

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by me

Not sure I understand this. Wasn't it Nogrod who said that?

Sorry. I get the point. Not so much Freudian as brain-fade ...

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

She could not know that Rikae would dream of her. .

But given her reputation she could expect to be high on any Seer's list of people to dream about. We know that she is one of the most feared players of the game. Look at how many wanted her dead even when she was exposed - next time if you want not to be distracted by a living but known cobbler, please consider just putting them on your ignore list for the remainder of the game . I am sure she probably regarded herself as lucky not to have been first choice.

[Lalaith]

I’ve got some thoughts together. They are somewhat based on previous WW experience (and partly influenced by Nogrod’s quiz in his WW game) as well as the current game.

Brinniel - I’ve got very little experience of her. But the smooth dark-horse routine that others have commented on is a bit suspect. I don’t like the way that she seems to pick up the gauntlet Saucie throws down in post 336, voting for Rune almost as if she was dared to.

Durelin – she is someone who I traditionally tend to suspect. I’ve been trying to fight against this and view her in an unbiased way. But there’s willful confusion in her posts, and that “yay!” is a classic wolf-post intro. I’m not happy.

Gil-Galad – Being much the same as always. That daft remark about Glirdan leads me to think he is probably innocent.

the guy who be short – Again, someone whose style I tend to find suspicious. But what tends to happen when I play with tgwbs is that I start off finding him very odd and suspicious and then my suspicions wear off. I will wait and see if this happens in this game.

Hookbill the Goomba – I know the breezy air is making people feel edgy but there’s an air of sincerity about his posts, I think.

Kath – A scary, scary girl (quack!) but I seek consolation in this comment about Roa which feels somewhat innocent:

think it would be worth killing her. Firstly we're rid of a most confusing influence, and second the thread will get a good bit shorter

Kitanna: I’m never sure what to make of her and like Kath she's someone who can act the same whether she's wolf or innocent. So far, in this game, she feels sort-of-ok.

Legate of Amon Lanc – Hmmm. The smoothly helpful newbie. Needs watching.

Mänwe – the stroppy noisiness on the first day was odd. Again, needs watching.

Mithalwen – is really puzzling me. Conversely to guy and durelin, she is someone I naturally incline to trust in ww. I know she can be jumpy, but there's something that just doesn't feel right. However, I’ll hold and wait on her for a while.

Rune Son of Bjarne – Another one I'm naturally suspicious of. But actually, I don't find him especially suspicious at the moment.

The Saucepan Man – I always fear Saucie as a matter of principle, so I’ve been looking at him closely. He is not the Cobbler in this game – thank goodness. But I’m a bit worried about this:

So, I find myself rather wary of those who voted other than for Roa

Then, later, his top two suspects are people who did vote for Roa. At around the same time as him. Go figure.
Actually, I’m inclined to think a wolvish Saucie would be more cautious and consistent than this. But I’m going to continue scrutinising closely.

Thinlómien – I do incline to trust Lommy so I've been trying to treat her with sceptism to counter this. However, in this game I am finding her innocent. Her point about no trail for kills was a good one, as is this:

think no one should start toDay what some started yesterday: trying to find clues from Roa's posts. It's just useless. She's cunning enough to make the posts misleading and as she had no real information, the analyser would be wasting his/her time

.
Furthermore, her analyses of people are roughly in accordance with mine, which I’ve always found a good indicator of innocence.

So –
Probably innocent – Lommy, Gil.
Possibly innocent – Kath, Kitanna, Hookbill, Rune
Watching: Brinniel, Legate, Manwe

Not happy about – Mith, twgbs, Saucie.

Most suspicious - Durelin

[the guy who be short]

I've just found out I can stay here for a while - probably until just before the voting deadline. Which means I can finally get down to a few analyses.

Firstly, I suppose I must agree with Nogrod about innocents being on both sides of the "lynch-Roa" campaign. I still think those trying to kill her were illogical, but I suppose this isn't grounds for lynching.

However, I will say this about Roa: Her claim that Rikae was not the seer were absurd. I reproduce my argument from post 324:

Roa's argument was illogical. If Rikae were a wolf pretending to be a Seer, the most sensible course of action would be to pretend two people were known innocents, thus gaining their trust. Why pretend to have dreamt of a cobbler? To cripple Roa? Why? Because she just happened to have accused one of them? Also, Rikae had been attacked the night before. We had only her word for this, but the chance of her lying was tiny, for that would mean the wolves had gone after somebody else AND the ranger had successfully protected this person. In addition, nobody attacked Rikae, claiming she could have been a wolf pretending to be the seer, on day 1 or early day 2. A real seer would at least have suggested this to try to throw suspicion on somebody who they would, in that scenario, be certain of being a wolf. It just didn't add up.

Now, it seemed to me that, due to the points above, nobody would take Roa seriously. However, people did, and that is very odd. I suspect that perhaps those who began to take Roa seriously were Faithful, trying to sow yet more confusion and waste the day. If a few people (Faithful) expressed doubts, this would probably induce others (who were innocent) to begin doubting Rikae. So, I suspect those who first expressed doubt in Rikae:

Post 195 is when Roa claimed Rikae was lying. Those to express doubts of Rikae, in order, were:

Manwe, post 203. Now this is very interesting!

I would also like to add, that Roa seems to have lost her 'cool' after the accusation. Seems rather desperate; now we have Rikae a possible Seer (possible in the eyes of Roa and a few others) revealing her as the cobbler.

What few others? Before this there was no doubt that Rikae was the Seer. Now, suddenly, according to Manwe, there are "a few others" who doubt her. This looks wolvish to me, as if being the first to express doubr in Rikae (as he does in the rest of his post) were not enough.

The next is Rune, post 204. While he expressed doubt in Rikae, it is not to the same extent as Manwe, who devoted a whole post to it. Rune also mentions other suspects he has. But still, this doesn't sit entirely well with me. He also says that the "safest action to take" is to "let Roa live for at least another day." I agree with that... but he doesn't say why! Does he have a reason?

Nogrod, post 205 - Known innocent, he expressed only the minutest doubt.



SpM and Brinniel, meanwhile, express faith in Rikae. This is consistent with my belief that the former is innocent, and also lessens my doubt of the latter. Durelin also Kath also express faith in Rikae, which I think supports their innocence.


I must leave the analysis half done for I am being caleld away. To be finished shortly.

[Nogrod]

Back again... and short on time as we all are (but I still have to share my time with Lommy here). But as I'm going to be around the next Day too I'd be ready to make a sort of compromise and narrow my view for toDay just to ease the task. There are enough of those Faithfuls left to make this move.

So I will not suggest we lynch toDay any of the newbies as this is just a game after all and should be fun. It would be nice to give the newcomers a good taste of this and be good sports. If someone comes up with a convincing case against one of them, I'm ready to reconsider.

So I'll leave out from my considerations toDay:
Brinniel
Hookbill the Goomba
Legate of Amon Lanc
Mänwe

With maths there should be one wolf in there and I wouldn't be surprised if there actually was. But there are three (at least two) in the remaining players as well.

Of the rest I would jump over Gil-Galad as well. Now he maybe a Faithful but getting into the bottom of that would be pure guessing. I would like go with a case of some kind toDay anyhow.

I think I will be looking at Durelin and tgwbs next. As I've said earlier I would love to have them both on our side but I have a bad feeling that at least another one of them is not. But I'll remind you, up to now it's only a feeling or a hunch. Nothing more. I'll try to see if I can find anything to back it or no.

Kath I'm afraid, as I'm always and even though I felt pretty good with Kitanna earlier I've began to get a bit worried about her too. Still I would kind of wish to have a reason before actually going after them.

Mith I kind of trust because of the way and tone in which she goes around. But then again she's a veteran who knows what to do. Still not too high on my list of suspicion.

Lalaith I feel somehow innocent but many of her actions just cry out a wolf. One of my top suspects right now.

The Saucepan Man has been lot more reasonable toDay and made a host of good points. Well, that's what one could suppose a suspected SPaM to turn out when being a baddie. Still taken notice of our situation I'm somewhat reluctant to drive for his lynch. Must see.

Lommy has gotten her act together as well toDay and looks better but there are also things that bother me. I'll try to have time to look at her too a bit more toDay (if time allows).

Rune Son of Bjarne I'm as puzzled as I always am. Somehow I just can't get a grasp of him, never.