Werewolf LIII: The Republic

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

What do you say, should we move on from the "have Gil read the rules discution" because I dont see that we will gain anythinge else than a high post count from it.

Anyways I read through Greenie's post and what she said about Kath, that made me go and read what Kath had said. . .because my short term memory is not working at the moment.
After looking at it I arrived at the conclution that Kath belongs on my shortlist of people I might vote for, it seems like the kind of post you would only write if it was true. I have often tried to read through a lot of posts and ended up with the conclusion that someone seemed wolfish without being able to say why. . .
Of course we cannot act on gut-feeling alone, but Kath speaks planely in a language the people can understand, she seems honest and straight to the point.

If she keeps it up I see no reason why I would not vote for her. (For Representative that is)

Re: Gil. Couldn't agree more. It doesn't help us any gamewise, unless he's trying to hide wolfishness behind not knowing the rules.

Re: Kath. Good to know. Perhaps, though, we could discuss that toMorrow, as we can't do anything about future reps before then? Not to say that you can't let your opinion be known, but I think it'd be better to talk about potential wolves than potential reps at this point. (And again, I'm tired, so if I misunderstand your post in some way please accept my apologies.)


In short, good thoughts. Now what do you think about wolves?

[Nerwen]

Can we assume that Gil's out? His confusion looks pretty genuine to me (however, I haven't played with him much).

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by satansaloser2005

Re: Gil. Couldn't agree more. It doesn't help us any gamewise, unless he's trying to hide wolfishness behind not knowing the rules.

Re: Kath. Good to know. Perhaps, though, we could discuss that toMorrow, as we can't do anything about future reps before then? Not to say that you can't let your opinion be known, but I think it'd be better to talk about potential wolves than potential reps at this point. (And again, I'm tired, so if I misunderstand your post in some way please accept my apologies.)


In short, good thoughts. Now what do you think about wolves?

No you did not misunderstand, but you picking Representatives and deciding who to lynch is in some ways related. I have no real lynch candidates, but I do have people that I think would be good Representatives or that I just have a good feeling about. By saying this about Kath, I also say that I do not want her lynched and as such it is part of that debate. . .

The alternative would be that I would be very quiet until I got a proper susbect and that could take a while.
It would also mean that I could not defend anybody from accusations, as my focus would be on their presumed innocens.

[the phantom]

Turned out I'm busier than I thought I'd be. But I'm here now and I'm slowly catching up on the last couple pages. After my first skim it's good to see some extra villagers are joining the fray.

As far as the comments regarding "The Terrifying Triangle of Doom!" (aka the Boro-Phan-Leg Triangle) I'm not sure what to say. Boro and I interacting is pretty standard.

Legate's 180 might have been planned, maybe not. But I'm not sure anything can be taken from it.

And as far as my selection of Legate for Rep, it was rather simple. Though I don't trust him (and I said that well before I picked him), I know I can count on him to be around and give me something to go on. In addition I did not want votes to be wasted and thus desired to give my vote to someone who already had a vote.

I couldn't vote for myself. Agan hadn't shown much and looked busy, so I wasn't going to pick her. I didn't have a read yet on Green, and wasn't sure I'd even get one from her on Day 1. I thought of Lommy as my pick, but I didn't trust her not to use my vote and stab me in the back with it.

Who is left? Legate. And the fact that he had given his vote to me made him an even more obvious choice.

But now I'm off to read more carefully. I'll begin more posts after lunch.

[Nogrod]

Oh my goodness what a read!

But I did it! And it only took something like 1½ hours...

So I'm updated at last. It will now take a cigarette and a glass of wine but I'm back pretty soon.

[Aganzir]

Di, Legate, Boro, Ilya, Shasta, sally
voted against filibuster. That's six out of 21. So for the time being it seems that filibuster is possible. At least I'm not going to vote against them (not that I'd be around at deadline anyway).

I don't know if I should be happy or terrified of phantom and Nog appearing at the same time.

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

No you did not misunderstand, but you picking Representatives and deciding who to lynch is in some ways related. I have no real lynch candidates, but I do have people that I think would be good Representatives or that I just have a good feeling about. By saying this about Kath, I also say that I do not want her lynched and as such it is part of that debate. . .

The alternative would be that I would be very quiet until I got a proper susbect and that could take a while.
It would also mean that I could not defend anybody from accusations, as my focus would be on their presumed innocens.

Nope, totally cool, I just wasn't sure what you were trying to accomplish with offering rep choices. Makes a lot more sense now. Thanks for explaining!

[Nogrod]

It's not in vain that democracy has been called the most civil form of government! Just look at the civility with which thoughts are exchanged here. And those who tend to go after each other in every game smile and say they tend to trust each other - and all the lists are full of people whom the posters feel innocentish and in the extreme occasion they only would like to hear more from some...

Okay. It's not that, but this game really is different. After we have used 24 hours thinking whom we trust we seem to have stayed the course and I'm seeing far less actual suspicion than I would have wanted to see at this hour.


Staying with the general issues for a moment still before going actually back to check some ideas on people that the read araised (and possibly starting to suspect someone openly?) I'd like to comment on the issue of choosing the delegates & reading the intentions behind those choices, which subject aroused some discussion earlier toDay.

First of all I wouldn't get troubled by the line up of our representative body toDay even if it consists mainly of some quite battle-hardenend independent-minded loudmouths. I would have been surprised were it any other way on this Day1. But as Days and Nights pass many of us get lynched or killed, some start to suspect one and someone else starts to suspect another etc. So the representatives will change and many people are brought forwards to bear the burden of responsibilty and looking-glass scrutiny the following Day on their turn.

That brings me to my second point. Someone said (Lommy it was?) that voting for someone as a representative would be nice buttering up, done by a wolf that is. Some might actually think so as trust feels good every time. But I'm not so sure how great a favour that will be. I'd be even more inclined to think that the best buddying up of a villager would be to call her/him "trustworthy" or "speaking sense" or "having great points" - and not vote her/him to be a representative.

Btw. the reason I'm getting an innocent feel from both Di and Rune is their apparent eagerness to make it to be a representative.

Thirdly about the eagerness of wolves to make it to being a representative which many here have taken for granted. I must say I'm not so convinced about it. Well, some might really wish for that as wolves just for the fun of it - and sure later it might be very important for the wolves to have their say in critical votes by the representatives. But on Day1 in a village this undecided?

Someone wondered why I proposed some quieter ones as representatives as going against my usual way of playing. Lommy already answered that (I wish to get the quieter people talking and taking responsibility and stop hiding in the shadows - or I wish to see more of the players I've not played before like the case with Ilya).

But I couldn't imagine trying someone out of the blue as my representative on Day5 just to see her/him perform. Or at least that would require some exceptional circumstances.

All in all this game is different so not all age-old and proven ways of thinking apply.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by the phantom

*sigh*

Let's get this over with.

++Legate for Rep

This hardly seems to be the attitude of logic and confidence regarding your vote that you presented in post #324. Which one is the reality?

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Shasta - I really, did not like some of his posts recently (around the time I voted) and I really, really, really don't like the vote for Aganzir - a kind of throwaway (in the sense: for somebody who was not around almost at all, a vote likely to disappear, while still not bringing Shasta into attention by that he wouldn't vote at all - a vote of a Wolf who is afraid to vote for a comrade, but afraid to vote for a "strong" player)? Wolf-on-wolf? Out of nowhere? vote.

These suspicions seem fabricated to me. Which posts in particular didn't you like, and why? Aganzir has been talking quite a bit toDay, so I'm entirely sure what you mean by "a vote likely to disappear." Had Aganzir been relatively quiet prior to the first DL? I can't remember. Maybe I'll check later.

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

There seem to be only one question that needs to be asked: Why would anyone vote for Brinniel?

Because she's a good player? Why are you opposed to Brinniel as a representative?

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Now that's a good point. Rather interesting... is there an explanation, Gwathie?

Not really. I haven't posted much yet because I am in the process of directing a play, i.e. I am busy. I'll try to post more in future Days. Speaking of which...I need to go do some blocking before the rehearsal.

[Kath]

Having just read the last post: Gwath, Rune said at the top of that post that nothing he was saying including that comment was actually based on the game, it was simply a first post nonsense thing.

Can I ask, what do the representatives actually want us to do? I mean obviously we can't vote but do you want to know who we would vote for if we could to help you make your decisions? Basically - do you want your votes to be based on the feelings of the whole village or are you on your own, votes based on your thoughts/gut feelings depending on which you use? It would just be nice to get an idea of how this is going to work.

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Kath

Having just read the last post: Gwath, Rune said at the top of that post that nothing he was saying including that comment was actually based on the game, it was simply a first post nonsense thing.

Oh. I wondered what that title meant. Thank you.

[Gil-Galad]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Can we assume that Gil's out? His confusion looks pretty genuine to me (however, I haven't played with him much).

never assume anything from me, knowing my luck i have stated 1-2 of the wolves already... i will lurk alot

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Agan

I found this comment not necessarily suspicious but weird. Is filibustering something you "really have to try"? Aren't there any possible advantages to it? You say the only purpose you can see it serving is chaos-creating, and I think that's exaggerating.

I don't have to try a filibuster. I can hardly see the point in it. I was just thinking that this village will want to try it and I can kind of see why - it's a once in a ww career chance. I think that much was pretty obvious from what I said. And no, I honestly cannot see it smartly serving any good purpose. If you can, tell me, and I even might become a filibuster-supporter.

Originally Posted by Agan

For I couldn't really see any triangle between them. Could either Lommy or Shasta, or both, explain to me where it came from.

I was merely pointing out the obvious: that those three have interacted with each other particularily much and stand out because of that and because of their loudness.

Originally Posted by Agan

Shasta. Don't really understand where that phantom-Boro-Legate triangle came from. It reminds me a bit of Nerwolf's "their interaction makes me think there might be a wolf involved" in some game ages ago.

I cannot see anything that suspicious in Shasta's actions, even though they were maybe a little weird.

Originally Posted by Agan

Legate. I don't know. I just somehow don't like him. I'm at a loss as to why he voted against filibusters because I myself can't see anything wrong with them (if someone is filibustering when I want to go to sleep, then I just don't vote), and his anti-phantom thing looked fabricated (which it probably was), as well as his wavering and 180 turn later on. However, his reaction to Boro's questioning looks rather innocentish.

"If someone is filibustering when I want to go to sleep, then I just don't vote"??? And you elected this person to be a rep? That is... outrageous. If someone has been given the trust to become a rep, it is utterly irresponsible to care so little about the vote. *shakes head*
Secondly, I diasgree with your suspicion of Legate. I think his anti-phantom thing was more like a sort of prejudice that simply wore off. And like I've said before, I doubt a wolf would have made such a 180 degree turn. That would have served no purpose but making him look more suspicious and gather attention.

Honestly, Aganzir's suspicions strike me as rather forced. I think she's merely trying to grasp any kind of behaviour she can call suspicious and make a horrible mess out of it. And she claims I'm exaggerating. How rude. Simply put, I don't think her behaviour looks like hunting wolves, it looks like hunting supicious behaviour. I cannot phrase it so that it makes any more sense, but I hope at least someone can understand that.

Originally Posted by Agan

Err? Your response looks rather empty. About whatever we do here is wolf-hunting, and at least I would consider going through the voting reasons wolf-hunting as well. You seemingly don't.

Ah, see? Again. She's taking something I've said and tries to make it as suspicious as she can. (I know someone who talks as carelessly as me must be an irresistible target... ) Going through the vote reasons is wolf-hunting, yes, but not the same way as rereading the thread, debating and making cases. Maybe I phrased that badly, but I think going through those reasons would be alittle secondary in a village like this where relatively few suspicions have been presented in realtion to the post/ page count.

Originally Posted by Agan

I found only one in my post. I can't speak for Greenie but I wouldn't call her use of positive adjectives great trust, either. If we have to vote early and you know it, why on earth are you telling us later that we trusted her way too much given how much she had posted?

If something frustrates me in these games it's that I always get suspected because people take my personal impressions as twisting of the truth. I got the impression that you trusted her quite a lot given the early phase of the game. I'm not going to continue arguing about the exact truth of this. It's the feeling I got and I'm entitled to it, you may have seen it differently, but frankly, I don't care. I cannot trust anything you say anyway. And lastly, to reply you, I think that's a pointless question. Of course you had to vote and give your trust to someone. I only think you gave your trust rather easily to her exactly and phrased it so that it looked rather easy.

Originally Posted by Aganzir

And I do think you've been exaggerating. Trying to make small issues sound bigger than they are.

Okay, I know I'm getting heated but this is just too much! You cannot say that to me. You're the one nit-picking and making mountains out of molehills all the time. I have no doubt it's wise to question about everything everyone says but when you do that, you can hardly blame anyone for making small issues sound bigger than they are.

Originally Posted by Boro

The question is would a wolf-Legate want to be this obvious, this early in the game? Is he trying to pull a double-bluff?

I've already talked about it, but I doubt he'd want to be that obvious. Of course, he is well able to pull a bluff like that, so who knows. He strikes me as rather innocent really, and I can't see all this sudden suspicion for him.

Originally Posted by Greenie

The triangle thing looks quite bad on him, actually - my guess is that where Lommy referred to a phantom-Boro-Legate triangle she meant that the three interacted a lot with one another and were in the centre of attention, Shasta took it as a suspicion that the three were fellows and grasped it. Please, Shasta and/or Lommy, correct me if I've misread you; but that's how it seemed to me.

More or less so, I think. At least for my part.

Originally Posted by Agan

And when Lommy gets home she will scream and jump up and down and wonder how I can be so annoying as to suspect her every time we play together.

I'm not screaming and jumping because of that, I'm screaming and jumping because your suspicions of me are so incredibly stupidly ill-based and wolvish! Anyway, I don't mind being suspected, really, it kind of makes it more probable to make it through the Night. And lastly, it would be hypocritical of me to be angry with you being like that because I too have fallen to my old habit - suspecting you in return.

Originally Posted by Greenie

Agan - thanks for clearing the Lommy thing up, it makes more sense now. The response doesn't look like the most innocent Lommy, though I still don't go so far as to suspect her because of that.

Now this really strikes me as terribly wolvishly diplomatic. *shrugs*

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Can we assume that Gil's out? His confusion looks pretty genuine to me (however, I haven't played with him much).

I think it looks genuine too.

Phantom's explanation for his Legate-vote makes sense. I don't suspect him right now even though I would kind of like to...

I will go to sleep soon, but I'd like to hang around for a little while and argue with the reps a little more... we'll see...


edit: xed with Nog and Gwath, and Kath, and Gil, and Gwath

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil

Not at all. He has long believed her secret real life identity is this lovely lady... I simply can't compete.

Nor can I alas... maybe in some parralel universe...

[Thinlómien]

Kath - I think we non-representatives should argue with the representatives and comment their suspicions. We should disagree with them and challenge them, but also tell them if we agree with their suspicions. Defend those they accuse but we think innocent, question their trust of those we find questionable. All in all, we should try to make them see what is good and what is bad in their judgement. Of course, we can also bring up totally new cases for them to consider.
We should simply help them make a good choice.

edit: xed with Mith - why do those corpses keep popping up all the time?

[Aganzir]

I try to be as objective as possible when reading through Lommy's posts.

Her first post consists mostly of quotes. She suspected werewolves would just try to lay low and vote innocents for reps because "it's more probable that a village lynches an innocent anyway." But what if not? I don't like such generalized assumptions. In my opinion, speculating about things like wolf tactics (or what roles there might be ) don't lead anywhere. There are so many possibilities. About that the blame cannot be put entirely on Lommy, though, since it was I think phantom who started on the subject.

I don't understand Lommy's negative attitude towards filibustering. Do you really think there are no advantages to it? It might create chaos, yes, but it might also be of some use.

I pretty much agree with Lommy's #89.

Etc.

She looked more innocent than not and I agreed with a lot of things she said during the first half of the day. It was only during this half that she started to sound odd.

She expresses concern about Agan-Brinn & Legate-phantom alliances because they are a good way to buddy up with fellow villagers. What's so curious about them? How are they a great way to buddy up? I was voted by Shasta and Brinn but that didn't make me change my mind about either of them (once that they explained their reasons). I don't think voting somebody for your rep is a matter of trust (but I might be in the minority when it comes to this). I think everybody is critical enough not to give their trust to anyone automatically.
If you're worried about wolves voting one another in order to become reps, I can understand that, but what does it matter? It's still so early that we can afford to lose innocents.
In the end I really fail to see what's so strange in them. Your way of thinking is too black-and-white for me.

Originally Posted by Lommy

although the thought doesn't quite cheer me, I think it's even quite probable that one of our newly elected reps is a wolf.

Oh what makes you think so? Why not two? Three? Four? None at all? Why one?

I'm still wondering why Lommy thought Greenie and I had great trust on Brinn. I assume she's going to respond to my earlier questions about it, though.

She made a list of people, concluding that everybody looked more or less innocent, with the exception of maybe phantom.

Originally Posted by Lommy

I'm sorry to say this but a dead phantom is the one I like the best because it's the only one that doesn't give me headache.

Hahaha I noticed this only now.

Given that Lommy has pretty much posts compared to most, there's almost alarmingly much chattering instead of actual substance. I'm not saying her posts lack in substance - there just seems to be relatively more other stuff. She brings up points, "we should do like this," or accuses people a bit (cannot trust phantom, morm, &c), but that's about it - mostly her talk seems to concern game mechanics and be rather shallow. I get an empty feeling from her posts.

As for empty posts, her #274 is a good example. I dislike the evasive way she responded to my suspicions. What can you make of this?

Originally Posted by Lommy

Could be. I have no doubt it will useful to go through all the reasons for the rep votes. But on the other hand, there's lots of other stuff that would be useful too, like for example wolf-hunting...

First she reacts very strongly to a seemingly minor issue, and when I question her about it, she looks like she tried to avoid the question.

More exaggeration: she says neither Greenie nor I spared positive adjectives when trying to justify our votes for Brinn. I called her trustworthy, Greenie good & sensible player and innocentish. To me it doesn't look like either of us was trying to flatter Brinn, least of all me. Then she claims that exaggeration is a part of her style and that she doesn't think she had been exaggerating that far.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Now that's a good point. Rather interesting... is there an explanation, Gwathie?

Maybe it's just me but I think you're grasping at straws - both of you. For some reason Greenie pointing out random things makes me feel uncomfortable. And somehow Lommy's reaction was a bit too enthusiastic. I don't know. It bothers me.

The result is that I suspect Lommy and it annoys me because I feel I suspect her just because of the way she is. I also find myself unable to compare this Lommy to any Lommy I know from the previous games. However I wouldn't probably suspect her half as much if not for those carefully self-consciously careless trying-to-say-nothing-or-at-least-sound-normal answers. They vaguely remind me of the pathetic Dueling Wizards wolf me who was trying to avoid suspicion and accusations when they kept piling on me.

I don't know what to do with Lommy.

edit: xed since Nog

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Kath

Can I ask, what do the representatives actually want us to do? I mean obviously we can't vote but do you want to know who we would vote for if we could to help you make your decisions? Basically - do you want your votes to be based on the feelings of the whole village or are you on your own, votes based on your thoughts/gut feelings depending on which you use?

Good that you asked as I was just about to make a short post asking for your opinions as thtree of us will have to vote within an hour or two.

The way I see it - and the way I'm going to act unless shown being totally wrong with my ideas - is that as a representative I will be the sole responsible person concerning my vote and I have no escape whatsoever to hide my vote behind what you people say. That's the position of a representative (you pick us, we pick the lynchee - and stand behind our votes).

But I'm the most willing to hear your views concerning suspicions if not for anything else then just for the fact that this thread is already such a megalomaniac thing that I would never have time to concentrate on all the things said. So you (and I when I'm not a rep) have a duty to bring forth ideas, suspicions, point out inconsistencies, tell about your hunches... and then the rep's make the choice.

So the villagers do their best to help and the representatives make the decisions based on the info they have gathered themselves, the info they have gotten from the villagers and other representatives and at the last stand relying on their own judgement.

And if one is not happy with a representative's judgement one does not vote for that one any more - and has a liberty to encourage others to not vote for that person either.

That's how I see it.

Uhh... X'd with a host of novellas...

[McCaber]

Just checking in to see what's happened so far in our little government.

Not a lot, apparently. Anything I would say right now has already been seen and commented on by the actual reps, so I hope they know what they're talking about. I mean, we elected them.

And even after this many WW games, I have almost no idea where people are getting so much Day 1 arguments from. Ah well. It gives me things to think about.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

edit: xed with Mith - why do those corpses keep popping up all the time?

We're all dead here sweetie.... besides my ears were burning

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Aganzir

She suspected werewolves would just try to lay low and vote innocents for reps because "it's more probable that a village lynches an innocent anyway." But what if not? I don't like such generalized assumptions. In my opinion, speculating about things like wolf tactics (or what roles there might be) don't lead anywhere. There are so many possibilities. About that the blame cannot be put entirely on Lommy, though, since it was I think phantom who started on the subject.

Intentionally or unintentionally, you're misinterpreting and misrepresenting me again. There's truth in what I said, but it was a sort of sarcastic comment, not a well-thought speculation about the game.

Originally Posted by Agan

I don't understand Lommy's negative attitude towards filibustering. Do you really think there are no advantages to it? It might create chaos, yes, but it might also be of some use.

I already replied to that. Please point out just one good use for it and I might change my mind.

Originally Posted by Agan

She expresses concern about Agan-Brinn & Legate-phantom alliances because they are a good way to buddy up with fellow villagers. What's so curious about them? How are they a great way to buddy up?

I think it's always curious when two people express mutual trust in ww game and on Day1. They're a great way to buddy up because one gets a nice warm feeling when someone says they trust them more than anyone else in the village. Really, why do you have to ask these things? Soon you'll probably ask "why does suspicious behaviour indicate someone's a werewolf (or possibly a gifted)?"

Originally Posted by Aganzir

If you're worried about wolves voting one another in order to become reps, I can understand that, but what does it matter? It's still so early that we can afford to lose innocents.

I did not say that! I'm more worried of wolves buddying up innocents.

Originally Posted by Aganzir

Oh what makes you think so? Why not two? Three? Four? None at all? Why one?

Because you're so obviously wolvish while the others are not. But no, seriously, it's just a number that occured to me. I'm not saying there couldn't be more, but like I already said, I think a majority of the wolves would prefer laying low and not getting elected.

Originally Posted by Agan

The result is that I suspect Lommy and it annoys me because I feel I suspect her just because of the way she is. I also find myself unable to compare this Lommy to any Lommy I know from the previous games. However I wouldn't probably suspect her half as much if not for those carefully self-consciously careless trying-to-say-nothing-or-at-least-sound-normal answers. They vaguely remind me of the pathetic Dueling Wizards wolf me who was trying to avoid suspicion and accusations when they kept piling on me.

If it helps you, it annoys me too. And I so much dislike your description of my answers because I feel so utterly wronged because I'M NOT DOING THAT!!!

Originally Posted by Agan

I don't know what to do with Lommy.

Vote me, and get me lynched as an innocent on Day1 for the second time in a row and ensure I will get you lynched at least thrice on Day1 just to settle it...


edit: xed with Nog, Cab and Mith

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Kath - I think we non-representatives should argue with the representatives and comment their suspicions. We should disagree with them and challenge them, but also tell them if we agree with their suspicions. Defend those they accuse but we think innocent, question their trust of those we find questionable. All in all, we should try to make them see what is good and what is bad in their judgement.

A good add-on to my post about the role of the villagers and the representatives...

There's been awful little of that critical discussion between the villagers and the representatives. But that's also for us reps to blame as I haven't seen too much suspicions made by the reps either (myself included).

Okay. Now I'm going to go back into the thread.

[THE Ka]

First of all, an apology for being late in the latter process of things. My internet and electricity in general went out before I arrived home from work and I've had to use a friend's computer so far, so I probably will be juggling my time a bit.

Originally Posted by Gwath

Casinos: the red man's revenge.

Indeed, brother, indeed. Probably the best place I've ever worked at, with casino dollars funding my future education too, It's lovely.

Okay with that aside, now to give a bit more opinion for Boro88.

I agree with your observations on Nogrod, and if he was a wolf, what he'd likely be inclined to do to have more involvement in his base. If you can't convince in all groups of innocents, it makes more sense after you've been elected to have your hidden wolves sent out to bring in the rabble lot of us. Like I said in an earlier post, even an innocent representative can have a few wolves in their fan base and not even know it. I don't doubt that there is at least one wolf as a rep, but I don't think they would direct their wolves to themselves only.

As for Legate's big turn around, I was a bit unnerved by his reaction in the beginning. I couldn't follow any of his reasoning near the end, until he was on a better footing with the rest of the more vocal voters, and it seemed rather smooth and collected. Though, I wouldn't immediately point my pitchfork and cry 'wolf!' over it, since it reminds me of typical Legate behavior. That's the only thing so far that I disagree a little with Boro88 over. Though, I'd definately watch for him in the future, at least in reaction to less than collected suspicion, where not everyone is rabbling over his behavior.
Immediately putting him up on the block and trying to lend a ledge to indecisive players to chirp in sounds like the beginnings of a wolfish bandwagon.

I don't have anything on Kath. Though, I'm more curious whether she was a safe vote, or seemed safe to others who either trust her for her wisdom or, are trying to suvive by echoing the thoughts of others. I don't distrust Kath, but more of those voting her way. I don't have much playing experience with her either, unfortunately. So far she seems rather innocent, while I need to look back over other's votes for her.

For once Agan, you haven't gotten my immediate suspicion (I think Lobelia and Radagast have come to terms through counciling... Or good tea). Usually I always keep a focused eye on her work, but with RL and such and then now I can't see much in the way of obvious or slight wolfy actions. I just don't have a definate judgement for her behavior.

Shasta seems, interesting at least (and comedic, this game needs it for sure...), but either through a lack of previous experience with their playing style or what else, I don't have a distinct suspicion on Shasta, though neither a definate feeling of innocence.

Though, I can agree with this:

Originally Posted by Shasta

Mostly that, at the time, everyone I wanted as a Rep already had two votes and everyone that had one vote was someone I didn't care to trust just yet. And I wanted to give my vote to someone who would use it responsibly, as you've shown you can do, in past games.

This appears reasonable in judgement to myself at least. I at first thought of voting for Ilya for the obvious difference such a possiblity could make amoung more experienced representatives, but I knew it wouldn't help myself much in forming an opinion or definate attachment to this games' conflicts in the end. Thus, I voted for B88, etc. From past experience I've always found that his sense in matters was grounded, even if I didn't agree with them.
In short, as far as voting is concerned, Shasta isn't alarming.

I need to read a bit more, but this is mostly what I have for now. I should have more outlined opinions come later, plus I need to give the computer back to my friend...

~ Ka

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

There's been awful little of that critical discussion between the villagers and the representatives. But that's also for us reps to blame as I haven't seen too much suspicions made by the reps either (myself included).

Yes that is fair point. I suspect the situation will be better automatically then, but I'd like to see the reps be a bit more active toMorrow before I have to go to sleep. This time, I mostly got to criticise Agan and Boro just a little.

Anyway, argumenting with silly Aganzir is frustrating so I'm going to sleep now....

Vote well, representatives. (You will be held responsible if an innocent is killed. )

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Gwathie

Aganzir has been talking quite a bit toDay, so I'm entirely sure what you mean by "a vote likely to disappear." Had Aganzir been relatively quiet prior to the first DL? I can't remember. Maybe I'll check later.

I made two posts during the first half of the day so yeah, you could call it quiet.

Lommy, it's just that your dislike of filibusters seemed so massive it couldn't be honest, as if you had purposefully decided to take/fake that stance.

Originally Posted by Lommy

And no, I honestly cannot see it smartly serving any good purpose. If you can, tell me, and I even might become a filibuster-supporter.

It's a powerful tool for controlling the lynch, and at least I would be ready to go for it if I wanted to save someone I really trusted from the gallows or didn't want to let someone I didn't trust become a rep (given that I would be around at deadline). Also, I don't find the thought that it could help to change somebody's mind impossible, although it's quite unlikely since you cannot make a proper case for/against anyone if you have to post every two minutes. If there were more than one person of the like mind it could work, though.

Originally Posted by Lommy

I was merely pointing out the obvious: that those three have interacted with each other particularily much and stand out because of that and because of their loudness.

Yes, just like it looked like there was at least one wolf involved in the Nilp/Form/Agan brawl back then?

Originally Posted by Lommy

"If someone is filibustering when I want to go to sleep, then I just don't vote"??? And you elected this person to be a rep? That is... outrageous. If someone has been given the trust to become a rep, it is utterly irresponsible to care so little about the vote. *shakes head*

Is it also outrageous if I vote against the wishes of those who voted me? To me it doesn't really make a difference.
You're overreacting again but I can't tell if it's because you're looking for reasons to accuse me or if you're genuinely annoyed with my irresponsibility and outrageousness.

Originally Posted by Lommy

And like I've said before, I doubt a wolf would have made such a 180 degree turn. That would have served no purpose but making him look more suspicious and gather attention.

And see, half the people are saying Legate looks more innocent because of his turn. Why wouldn't a wolf do it?

Originally Posted by Lommy

Simply put, I don't think her behaviour looks like hunting wolves, it looks like hunting supicious behaviour. I cannot phrase it so that it makes any more sense, but I hope at least someone can understand that.

Suspicious Lommy = wolfish Lommy. What's the real difference between suspicious and wolfish, tell me?

Originally Posted by Lommy

Ah, see? Again. She's taking something I've said and tries to make it as suspicious as she can. (I know someone who talks as carelessly as me must be an irresistible target... )

Ooh a counter-attack eh? You shouldn't blame me if you talk carelessly and give a wrong impression.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Maybe I phrased that badly, but I think going through those reasons would be alittle secondary in a village like this where relatively few suspicions have been presented in realtion to the post/ page count.

You did. It took me a while to understand what the whole thing had to do with everything else you had said.

Originally Posted by Lommy

It's the feeling I got and I'm entitled to it, you may have seen it differently, but frankly, I don't care. I cannot trust anything you say anyway. And lastly, to reply you, I think that's a pointless question. Of course you had to vote and give your trust to someone. I only think you gave your trust rather easily to her exactly and phrased it so that it looked rather easy.

It would have made a difference if you had said more clearly that it was the impression you got instead of treating it as a fact that I trusted Brinn so much.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Okay, I know I'm getting heated but this is just too much! You cannot say that to me. You're the one nit-picking and making mountains out of molehills all the time. I have no doubt it's wise to question about everything everyone says but when you do that, you can hardly blame anyone for making small issues sound bigger than they are.

Hahaha You made me laugh, love. <3
It's the feeling I got and I'm entitled to it.

edit: xed with everyone since my last post

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Lommy

Intentionally or unintentionally, you're misinterpreting and misrepresenting me again. There's truth in what I said, but it was a sort of sarcastic comment, not a well-thought speculation about the game.

If it begins with a speculation about the game, be it well-thought or not, there's nothing to say the end is sarcastic, and I'm probably too tired to get your sarcasm right now. So if there was a misinterpretation, it was unintentional.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Really, why do you have to ask these things? Soon you'll probably ask "why does suspicious behaviour indicate someone's a werewolf (or possibly a gifted)?"

Quite the contrary. Actually just in your previous post if I remember correctly you were accusing me of trying to find suspicious behaviour instead of wolfish. So why does suspicious behaviour indicate someone's a werewolf? Tell me that.

Originally Posted by Lommy

I did not say that! I'm more worried of wolves buddying up innocents.

I know you didn't, but I guess I automatically assumed that was one of your reasons since to me it seemed the only sensible reason to be suspicious of alliances.

Originally Posted by Lommy

Vote me, and get me lynched as an innocent on Day1 for the second time in a row and ensure I will get you lynched at least thrice on Day1 just to settle it...

And that's just the reason I don't want to do it right away! I suspect you always and am wrong more often than not because you're innocent more often than not.

Originally Posted by Ka

I think Lobelia and Radagast have come to terms through counciling... Or good tea

Would you like a cup of Darjeeling, dear Radagast?

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Really? And what would you consider productive (than five pages)? And that says the one who gives two one-liners and then votes.

Touché

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

And this I call kind of an alibism, of sorts. But okay. Well, I am really raising my eyebrows at this post.

No, it's just me at 00:20 in the morning.

still reading page 7...

[Aganzir]

I really want to go to sleep in an hour.

Could you Eönwë answer to my questions before that since you are one I'm considering.

I'll go, have something to eat and take a shower. Back soonishly.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Another list, to help me get my thoughts in order and to see just who I want to go back and look at since I haven't had time.

Aganzir - No alarms, I'm glad to see she's here today.
Boromir88 - Seems sensible.
Brinniel - Still innocent.
Diamond18 - Where is she?
Eönwë - No read.
Gil-Galad - No read.
Greenie - Not much of a read, but what I've seen of her so far I think innocent.
Gwathagor - No read.
Ilya - No read.
Legate - He's pinging my alarms a bit.
Lommy - She and Agan seem like our brawling innocents.
Kath - Seems helpful, but in the shadows. I'd like to hear more.
McCaber - No read - hardly surprising. Pops in with a comment and pops out again.
mormegil - Seems sensible.
Nerwen - Still innocent.
Nogrod - Probably innocent.
Rune - Seems sensible.
Sally - No read.
Shasta - Obviously a wolf.
The Ka - Ka is one I'd like to go back and look at.
the phantom - Obviously a... well... hmm. I think he seems innocent-ish, but you never can tell with this guy.

[the phantom]

Hmm... And yet again there's a Lommy-Aganzir thing going on. The last time I saw something like this there turned out to be something to it. Let us hope it isn't a waste of time in this village either.

That said I almost wish we could keep them both around and let them continue gunning, for I believe that will help us get a feel for them after the day is done and we can go back and read the posts without time constraints.

At this point I'm thinking I may have to vote more on principle than feeling. I haven't gotten to read as much as I had hoped. Schedules don't always go as planned.

Originally Posted by Lommy

PS. Now that tp is elected a rep, I feel inclined to vote against a filibuster...

I'm only likely to try a filibuster to save my own life, and as I do not appear to be under threat currently, I would say you don't have to fear a filibuster.

Originally Posted by Legate

POWEEEEER!!! UN-LIMITED POWEEEEEER!!!!!!!!

I'm enjoying the Star Wars quotes. Keep them coming if you want my continued support.

(to be continued...)

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

I will expect to get at least 50% of the votes either from Representatives, the wolves or the next time we elect representatives.

So you want to die? Do you just feel too guilty inside?

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I agree, nonetheless (forgot to include this in my last post) that it's rather peculiar that Aganzir got in this time, when I believe she's only made one post.

Hmm... (It was actually 2, but still). I am going to have to make a list of the quick (in part 1) reps that got voted for seemingly out of nowhere. At least, after I finally finish catching up.

[Aganzir]

I'm back.

I don't think I will vote Lommy today. It was after all just a few things that made me suspect her in the first place (which is not enough to make me lynch her on day 1 twice in a row), and her replies to me seem genuinely frustrated in an innocentish way. I'm still suspicious of her but I rather give her the benefit of doubt for now.

I wouldn't like to vote Eönwë before he has answered my questions, which I hope he will do before I leave.

Legate might be one option, but I feel uneasy with how many people have expressed suspicion on him since I myself don't feel there are that good reasons for it.

Nothing's changed on my No idea list, so basically those three are my option.

I trust Shasta more now but I have a slightly uncomfortable feeling about him anyway.

edit: xed with phantom and Eönwë

[Nogrod]

Oh my... I had a few ideas that had made me wonder while I read through the thread earlier toDay but it seems they were ill-gotten. Like that I had a strong impression that after Lommy and I argued for the benefits of choosing a less known person as a representative there was a wave of points out of thin air made to suggest Ilya was also their choice for a rep but they just didn't act that way because she had been already elected. So they were basically going with the flow and trying to look like they thought similarly with the majority. I really had a kind of a parrot-feeling on that and that always sends the alarms ringing with me. But there was no such a large and unfounded thing to be found... except possibly Eonwë who posted a little after my vote.

He considered myself and Greenie as his representative and as a third option he gave...

Originally Posted by Eonwë

Then there is Ilya, but I don't really know her well enough yet, though she seems innocent enough.

I'm not sure if you get what I mean but that does look suspicious. Of all the people around here he picked the three of us (choosing Greenie btw.) but unlike myself or Lommy who had actually argued why Ilya should be chosen (or anyone whom we'd like to see more of and feel somewhat safe with) he just went with the flow with no explanation of why he thought she could be a good choice, like stating something obvious for a choice of a representative with the "Then there is...".

But I'm not too confident on this. It could go either way.


To other things.

At the moment it looks like on the top of things there are:

The row between Aganzir and Lommy. Argumentwise I'd say Agan looks the more innocent one, feelingwise I think Lommy looks the more innocent (she felt genuinely frustrated - although a wolf might feel the frustration as well to be sure). So I just can't avoid the idea that it's two innocents tearing each other apart.

The skirmish between Gil and Shasta was amusing indeed but didn't tell us much. But just looking at the row it would make me feel Gil more innocent (I don't think he would make such a number were he a wolf) and leaves me quite empty-handed with Shasta. Shasta's enthusiasm to get on Gil could be seen as a wolf finally finding a target - and his retreat from it after Gil got personal would be just wise from a wolf as well. The problem is there's a host of "if's" there.

Legate's 180 (how easily catchphrases are born...) and his involvement leave me as baffled. His defence of himself yesterday was genuine-looking to the fullest but the act of turning around with tp looks bad. Agan already made the point that as most of the people who have discussed it have thought a wolf would never do that is a reason to consider it a succesful move by an intelligent wolf as a possible option.

One thing I would like to add here is that we do have a seer around here and the wolves wish to avoid her/his gaze. So doing something spectacularly innocentish-looking would be a decent tactics on that as the seer needs to consider whom s/he wishes to dream each Night. That kind of spectacle might be worth trying as the seer could well think:
"well Legate... hmm... but he wouldn't have done that were he a wolf, right, maybe I have more urgent reasons to check X this Night... I'll check him later when it's less pressing"
And we all know those less pressing times never come...

It seems I have the weightiest reasons to suspect Legate then? But I'm more than reluctant to try him out toDay for the case is more speculative than I'd wish it to be were I to vote someone who could be such an assistance to us.

Taking a short break and coming back with hopefully refreshed thoughts...

EDIT: X'd with a lot...

[the phantom]

I see Rune showed up late and has started campaigning to be a Rep. Naturally we should kill him for it.

And after reading more from Boro, I've decided to consider him innocent for exactly two days. Just because.

Green creeps me out a little, but maybe it has nothing to do with this game.

Aganzir... she's either playing well as a WW or she's innocent. So I'd like to give her a pass for today.

Originally Posted by morm

sticking out most on my radar are the phantom becuase of his silliness. I've NEVER seen him like this.

We can't all be grumpy like you, no matter how hard we try.

But seriously, I'm just feeling a little carefree is all. It's Day 1, and when it's over there will be so much to look at and examine! And guess what? I'm off of work tomorrow and Friday, and so I'll be able to examine until my eyes fall out!

Because of this I figure I'll try and not be too serious this first day and just thrash around a bit and then when it's all done I can put the thinking cap on and look things over.

If it would make you feel better I could start being insulting.

Jerk.

(to be continued)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, just to let you know, I am here (for already some time) and now I am at the end of page 7, resp. the beginning of page 8. Try not to post too much and I should eventually be able to post here... hopefully soon.

[Ilya]

I'm here.

Need to go back and read, but to answer Aganzir re: my suspicions of Brinn: first, they weren't and aren't that strong. It was the fact that she got two votes rather early in the day, is all. I want to go back and reread the whole thread again to see if there was anything textual that weirded me out or if it was just nerves. Day 1 had me jittery, especially early on, because a lot of people were bringing up their history of playing with each other and this is my first go. So to see voting as early as it happened, you know, it's the perpetual fear of the kid who doesn't realize she's all alone until everybody else has already partnered up.

Also, the Agan-Lommy thing (do they do this a lot?) doesn't worry me as much as the Gil-Shasta stuff does, or more particularly, Shasta jumping on Gil multiple times. Don't know what to make of it, but it raised more flags.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Also, someone talked about a charismatic wolf representative leading the village...

Now that is quite scary

Originally Posted by A Little Green

You guys should really really slow down. I've been reading the thread for a few hours...

Totally agree with you there. And its a few pages later now.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

I agree that when playing werewolf one should contribute and post actual substance; nevertheless, I don't like the way people seem to think that flooding the thread with posts is the only right way to play and the closer you get to that the better you are. We can't all be phantoms or Nogrods, nor do we need to be. It's just alarming how this "loud, experienced veteran" type seems to be the "ideal" werewolf player who sort of must be respected just because of that status. No, I'm not saying "Don't respect experienced loudmouths". What I mean is that we should avoid only considering these kind of players as good players or players worth being a rep.

Yeah, the main idea of Werewolf does seem to be forgotten. The main aim (as I see it) is to catch the baddies without being caught yourself. And to have fun. Though being loud does have its advantages, and if you do post substantial posts then it is also very productive, not everyone has enough time. Not everyone is a phantom. Quiet people can still be helpful, and maybe some are quiet because they are thinking, rather than just posting anything that comes into their heard before it even has time to register and form links with other stuff. Once its posted, you tend to stop thinking about the subject (or at least I do) and it becomes frozen like that- set in stone. Then it is harder for your ideas to move, and if they do, you look suspicious. The quiet ones can often be the most sharp.

Lost my train of thought... (there was going to be another paragraph

So I'll end this post...

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I won't pull a Legate 180.

A new
Downerism has been born!

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I'm not quite sure where you, or Shasta got that idea from. Shasta said he got it from Lommy, who originally pointed it out. But, if I recall all Lommy did was really point out the obvious. That us 3 were obviously interacting, but didn't inquire any further

A bit like a "Paper Telephone" round, eh

edit: fixed quote- not even bothering to see who I x-ed with.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Originally Posted by Ilya

or more particularly, Shasta jumping on Gil multiple times. Don't know what to make of it, but it raised more flags.

I jump on Gil every time we play together. I'm light, it doesn't hurt him any.

[the phantom]

Ah, so Gil is here. He usually figures out who the WWs are, but he also tends to get himself lynched. Careful laddie. You sit well with me right now due to your location. Strong Bad is awesome.

The Shasta-Gil exchange made me laugh. That's enough for me to keep Shasta around despite not trusting him yet.

Originally Posted by me

*sigh*

Let's get this over with.

++Legate for Rep

Originally Posted by Gwath

This hardly seems to be the attitude of logic and confidence regarding your vote that you presented in post #324. Which one is the reality?

Excellent question. The explanation of post #324 is quite accurate. But note that the logic of picking Legate is due to the fact that he is the one that is left after I rule others out, and also because he voted for me.

In other words, it doesn't stem from trust or anything of the sort, and so I picked him as my Rep because he simply had to be picked- not because of any strong desire to select him.

That attitude comes out in my selection post. The "sigh" is basically saying, "I'm not allowed to pick the only person I trust (me), and really my choice is already made for me, and I have no clue if this is good or bad, but it needs to be done anyway. Oh well. I hope things turn out well."

Yeah, I know- that's an extremely meaningful sigh, isn't it?

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Ilya

Also, the Agan-Lommy thing (do they do this a lot?) doesn't worry me as much as the Gil-Shasta stuff does, or more particularly, Shasta jumping on Gil multiple times. Don't know what to make of it, but it raised more flags.

Yes we do. Far too often, at least if you ask Lommy.

I didn't find the Gil-Shasta quarrel suspicious. I think that's the way Shasta usually is, which doesn't indicate anything, while Gil looked pretty innocentish.

edit: xed with Shasta & phantom

[the phantom]

I won't pull a Legate 180.

Originally Posted by Eonwe

A new Downerism has been born!

I was going to say that!

In the future, if someone reverses their stance, it will be "Doing a Legate". Ha ha ha!

Hmm... What's something that I can do to turn my name into something cool like that?