Tol-in-Gaurhoth CXIV – The Evil Breath of Morgoth in Dor-lómin, game thread

[Rikae]

Quick post while working:

I still find G55 worrying, but I seem to recall her being one of those "always suspcious" players in the past, plus the way certain others ... Kath and Brinn ... went after her looks a little opportunistic.
Not enough to make me suspect them yet, but I am making a mental note.

Pitch's interactions with G55 could be a wolf protecting an innocent who is under suspicion so as to rack up some "brownie points" later on, or also a wolf protecting a wolf. His very first banter post seemed nervous to me, and subsequent posts seem calculated.

Why is Mac looking suspicious to me? It's mainly the way he goes after Legate initially. Yes, Legate was the one to push the "fake vote" idea forward seriously, but that felt very innocent to me. He stuck his neck out, provoked conversation, thought aloud, and generally behaved like himself. I would expect Mac to recognize the same thing, and instead he seems to ... take the bait? Nothing else, really, except the gleeful feel in his posts, but that could just be the joy of playing again after such a long time. I don't know. He does love playing as a wolf, but I think he also enjoys looking sinister as an innocent.

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Speaking of overcomplicating things, where did this whole idea of waiting for guidance from the QT come from? And why would we 'always have to second-guess' the QT vote,
as G55 said in #56? Unless there's a quarantined Seer AND the majority of the Cuties are innocent, the QT vote is just another vote that may be rght or wrong or misguided or driven
by evil intentions like everybody else's. No way for us to know.

Answer: I think Legate first brought it up, as an explanation for why fake votes would make sense, and I agreed. It was a worry I had since I saw the mechanic in the discussion thread. Yes, it's just one vote, but it will be a vote from a group of people whose roles are known, and therefore, it *will* be a source of valuable information (downplaying that is rather suspicious in itself). My fear is that players will hold back, wait for that information, and then cram the whole day into the last 2 hours. How exactly that would play out depends on the specifics, but in general I think anything that dampens conversation is detrimental to the village (not to mention probably annoying to people for whom the deadline is late).

[Pitchwife]

Right, I've got to run some errands now (properly masked, to be sure!). See you all later.

[Kath]

Originally Posted by Hui

Now this is interesting. I don't think I agree with the first paragraph - I still think there's something suspect going on in the LGP matrix - but as far as I can see, Mac is the main other person with multiple people throwing significant suspicion at them. I can't see a wolf in that position trying to divert attention from the only people diverting attention from them.

Do you mean that Mac is unlikely to be a wolf because if he was, it would be silly to stop people focusing on Legate-Pitch-G55 and draw suspicion onto himself? Also, is Mac that heavily suspected? It seemed more like Legate and G55 were after the discussion pretty much tailed off.

Originally Posted by Pitch

I don't think I've seen that many people suspecting Mac to a significant amount (Rikae, of course, myself a bit, who else?), more like saying he's creepy & scary no matter what. Anyway, it's always good for a wolf pack not to get all entangled in the same skirmish but spread themselves out in several combat zones, so to speak.

Ah, which I think kind of answers my question. Was it just things like Boro saying he often suspected Inzil and is always wary of Mac? I hadn't really considered those kind of mentions as proper suspicions but maybe I was just assuming that.

[A Little Green]

This is hopeless! Every time I finish reading and click refresh before starting to write my post, there’s like 10 new posts to read I'll be back with something more substantial soon, but just to recap first -

Looks like since I was last here, first Huinesoron and Kath (and later Inzil, Kitanna and others) make a fair point about how the fake-vote plan got pinned on Legate while its originator, Gal55, distances herself from it quite quickly. The main people implicated by this (aside from Gal herself) are considered to be Pitch, Boro and Mac, though it’s quite likely at least some of them just started discussing it as Legate’s plan because others already were. Pitch then explains that he focused on Legate because he read it as Gal throwing a random idea around and Legate latching on to it and making it into an actual plan. This seems legit enough. (Not sorry. ) Additionally, Mac gets suspected by Rikae for trigger-happily suspecting Legate when he actually just says Legate is a possible cobbler, and later Legate calls him fishy for “subtly pointing fingers while not accusing straightforwardly” – barely halfway through Day 1. Meanwhile, Boro seems unusually chirpy, Lhuna casts a kamikaze vote and Lommy has progressed to meta-flipflopping.

Whoever said Day 1s are uneventful should have a look at this one.

Edit: x-ed with Rikae, Pitch and Kath

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Reading and writing as I go... note: the beginning of this is like three hours old. Been checking and typing in between work whenever I had time.

Originally Posted by Kitanna

I read this as "maybe veer away from lists" and just say you're going to commit to one person, even if you don't vote that way. I see where you're coming from as the lists help wolves form bandwagons and this will force them to really push their accusations. Except this will force innocents to do the same, with the same bloody lynching result. It's early and maybe I'm reading all this wrong, but this idea seems as likely to backfire as to succeed.

Well, as you see, I just made a list myself. Anyway, the idea was people could do whatever they want, even make lists (I like lists), but then, when the clock strikes, they would have to say "ok and out of my list, I actually pick THIS ONE".

The main benefit of this would be that we could then see who would be "lynched" under such circumstances - and then that could be helpful in tracing the Wolves. Because in "real" voting, WWs are calculating to save their mates and so on. In "dry run", it isn't so clear, and then they may be a bit at loss as to what to do. Would they cast their "pseudo-vote" to "save" their packmate even if it is only a dry run? But what if then the real vote happens and the situation goes the same way and they have to change their vote? They need to provide an explanation. It may draw eyes. Etc etc. THAT was the chief merit behind the theory that was discussed so lengthily here.

Anyway, on another note, Kitanna sorta made my red lights flash now, too.

Originally Posted by Kitanna

Not helpful whatsoever? I dunno, the need to point out "this wasn't helpful" makes me raise my eyebrows. We already had some posts and discussions going when you chimed in and it just seems suspicious you felt the need to point out you had nothing to add at the time. "Look at me, I'm definitely innocent because I haven't said anything of real merit."

I sorta don't like the way Kitanna points fingers at Lhuna here. Yes, she may have just happened to make that one random observation, but the way it goes...

And the whole "oh I don't know if we should do this or that..." is kinda, I don't know. I simply get "fake vibe" here. Like she was not willing to commit until she learns where the wind blows. (Wind. Get it? *dun dun dun dun* -Note: once again, no relation to Inziladun whatsoever)

Originally Posted by Inziladun

But wasn't that the purported point of the "fake" vote: to keep last-ditch voting down?

Yes, but this was already said with the knowledge that this was probably not happening, plus anyway, I still expect people to vote in the last twenty minutes, with or without any "voting dry run". And the votes would change, very likely, in the last few hours, not the least because of people's reactions to the "results" of the dry-run voting (or would they? That's precisely the thing we would not know without trying it first).

Originally Posted by Lalaith

Oof. Three pages of posts already. Five wolves in there somewhere causing chaos, with a cobbler urging them on.
I'd better get reading....

That was as fishy first post as they go. "Everyone is a Wolf, hint hint not me."

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

As far as I can see, most of it is agreement with and slight expansion on what other people had said; is that what you meant by 'fishy as Angband', Legate? You talk about pointing fingers, but other than the explicit point at Galadriel55, it all looks like fairly general musing on wolves.

Pointing fingers "under one's breath", i.e. saying that something is questionable while mentioning a name at the same time, so the reader can connect them themselves while the original poster doesn't need to be perceived as the one who said it in the first place, is one of classic Wolf-tactics, one I am always more inclined to look for.

Originally Posted by Kitanna

*side eyes both* Orchestrated wolf action? I suppose not likely, but the more I read of G55 the more I raise my eyebrows.
She distanced herself from her own idea, was quick to challenge Legate when he found the merit in it, and has been fairly vocal throughout. And yet, when I try to think of anything detailed she said, I draw a blank. She's been helpful and has urged on discussion and I'm finding her a little too helpful.

On the one hand G55 set something up and waited for an innocent to take the bait and then distanced herself the moment it fell under scrutiny. Her move is a bold one for a Day 1 ploy to try to bandwagon an innocent. Bold and fairly early in the Day.
On the other hand wolfPitch sees an idea that is probably doomed to fail. He picks the second person to pick it up and doesn't really cast suspicion on the actual creator. Pitch then sets up Legate for trouble.
In the whole fake vote debate, I am leaning toward trusting Legate over G55 who first suggested it and Pitch who was so vocal in disputing it.

This sounds like a Wolf making up a random accusation if I have ever seen one. As in, the type of behaviour a Wolf might have if they are like "I need to find someone to suspect on Day 1, oh, here's some two players saying something, I can latch onto that". That sort of thing for a Wolf who would not be in the thick of things, but would want to just quietly pursue some case in their own little corner.

Also because I don't personally believe that it was an attempt to "set me up", or not in the way people seem to be latching on to presenting it. I think Pitch quite rightfully saw me as expanding on the idea while when G55 mentioned it, it was really just a random remark. I find it much more likely that someone picked on the "this was an attempt to set Legate up" notion to raise suspicion about those who did.

I will reread Kitanna's posts a bit, but she would likely be my "fake vote" toDay, at least (or to put it another way, if I was forced to vote right now).

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Mac, really? You find it odd how I pinned the no-vote stuff on Legate, when earlier you yourself found it just as odd how enthusiastic he was about it? Now that I find odd! *ping*

Maybe I shouldn't, but I just find this amusing

Originally Posted by Boromir88

It's like Gandalf versus the Balrog to use that analogy. To me, he's got a powerful and deserved reputation. I'll go for it, but I don't charge head on, because I know I won't come out the same person.

Man, can I ship ya folks? (Sorry. Lommy taught me that kind of vocabulary.)

Originally Posted by Lhunardawen

You mean like this?

++NILPAURIO-- I mean

++LHUNARDAWEN

Seriously!!! That's about the most unhelpful thing ever!!! I mean, I understand you are substituting Nilp, but I'm with Kant on this one. You shouldn't make the example of doing something that might corrupt others to do the same!

x-ed with plenty probably, I'm still in haphazard schedule on when I am around and when not.

EDIT: x-ed basically since the abovequoted post. Page 4, terrifying. (Although again, with the size of the village, could be worse.)

[THE Ka]

Had to sleep and drive some family into work, but I'm back and wow there's a lot to read backwards...

Originally Posted by Brinniel

If he's evil, he's being rather bold, and if he's innocent, a wolf could use his posts to build a case against him. Then again, there could be no wolves involved and they are just quietly letting this play out.

I’m not getting the inclination of much wolfish behavior, even a bold one. You could argue it’s an attempt to just distract villagers from having the time to deduct their own theories by forcing them to both come up with something on the spot and defend themselves with the equivalent of sticks and stones. Then again, the last few hours around DL are typically the same and a veritable gold mine of information the next day.

Only thing is, as much as it disagrees with some of our play styles, it sounds more an attempt to just generate enough evidence in a large group to later sift through. Considering the group in whole is looking like it’s somewhat evenly divided along two main time zone groups, it obviously isn’t going to work for some of us on the outlier which makes it mechanically unappealing. Killing off someone just because they don’t reside in a convenient time zone to you is some bad taste, so it would be difficult to force the entire group into it.

It is a bold suggestion though, but I don’t think ultimately beneficial to a wolf unless they’re exclusively going to play big and bold the entire time (which doesn’t help their fellows from scrutiny unless their whole plan is for one to carry the team, which is rather silly).

It’s the inversion of the typical ‘shake the tree and see what falls out’ approach most of us take and more of a ‘chop the whole thing down and see what it pins beneath and what flies away’. Looking back, it is a newer attempt than what some of us are used to, but I think it was a more genuine attempt to force people to generate opinions. Even disagreeing with its method, I can’t outright find a good reason to fault it as ‘wolf behaviour’. We’re associating the idea with Legate though because they were the first to analyze it at length.

Originally Posted by G55

D1 + N2 = 2 players to vote on D2. I believe the thread is inactive at Night, and in any case voting only happens during the Day.

Laying in bed last night when I should’ve been sleeping, I realized this at 3AM… You’re right there would still be the one chosen by vote and the one off’ed in the Night phase.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

it’s easy to stick to talking about the loudest, most controversial villagers and topics and let others fly under the radar completely. This tends to serve wolves better than innocents since odds are at least some of them are among the quiet, less attention-seeking crowd.

Similar reason why I am doubting a wolf group would have a plan to just make one of their number as brash and vocal as possible. It might work if we’ve never played before, but for some of us, we know better than to think there wouldn’t be some wolves assuring themselves safety behind any number of theories. I’m not immediately suspicious of the first person to jump behind whoever has the biggest argument. It’s the third or fourth person after it looks like the previous two haven’t been attacked for doing so I’m observing.
I’d be afraid of our wolves flipping the script and doing what we’d least expect, but then I have to remind myself that there is a good possibility some of them are as out of it as we are and don’t really have the security of ‘new tricks’ to try out.

Originally Posted by Inzil

I think overly analyzing the QT vote is ill-advised. As noted, the predominant alignment of those there will be known, and we just keep that in mind when we see their vote. Even if they're mostly Innocent, they could be wrong.

To a point, yes. I guess since we are it’s beta testers we won’t know how it performs until at least after the first few Days. Considering that we’ve confirmed all roles in QT can PM one another (and wolves to fellow wolves) during their night phase, the QT could be used as a ‘second chance’ to try other methods out for both villagers and wolves. They might not vote how we’d prefer of them, whether wrong or no to what we’re championing in the GT.

Originally Posted by Inzil

Of course! Then there's more reason to bandwaggon the accuser!

Alright, I legitimately laughed out loud at this.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Rikae

Defend, hm? Just jokingly summarizing the initial conversation. I was curious to see what sort of reaction it would get, though.

And I jokingly called you out on deliberately summarizing incorrectly. This only serves to sow confusion and derail the village, or give people (you most of all) an excuse to vote based on, frankly, false grounds if the vote is based off this post. My point still stands.

Originally Posted by Rikae

I was referring to not voicing serious suspicions before the QT vote, which would make for a very unproductive day, no trails, lazy justifications. and a good environment for wolves to hide, which is why (I hope) innocents will avoid doing it.

Ah, gotcha. Agreed.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

I also disagree with Gal about lists being vague and useless. I personally find them quite helpful; without them it’s easy to stick to talking about the loudest, most controversial villagers and topics and let others fly under the radar completely. This tends to serve wolves better than innocents since odds are at least some of them are among the quiet, less attention-seeking crowd. I’m not saying everyone should do lists, just that I think they can be just as revealing as fake votes (if not more).

Oh yes, making sure you go through everyone is crucial. However, the problem with a list is it can go like this: "I find, T, U, V, W, X, Y, and Z most suspicious, but maybe not, and I'll see where the wind blows before making up my mind on my preferred candidate". Or, "I don't even know who I am suspicious of right now, everyone seems ok, my vote will be wrong anyways" (classic D1 list, no?). Having to pick one person while you make your list has the benefit of then making you have a good explanation if you change your mind.

As for wolves maintaining consistency more easily than innocents - that is true, however wolf-on-wolf wagons would be harder to do as everything often hangs so closely in the balance. Do you try to save your mate, or go against them? It becomes a lot trickier to hide those decisions.

Originally Posted by Kath

There's been some talk about Cobbler-identifying along the way as well. But the rules state that the Cobbler counts for the Innocent tally, so picking them out over finding wolves doesn't really help matters.

No one cobbler hunts over wolf hunting, but shouldn't it be a sort of secondary goal? And precisely for the reason that you say: the cobbler counts as an innocent. If you have a known cobbler, you have a known innocent. If you have a suspected cobbler, you have a suspected innocent. So you should be wary of what they say, but if it comes to voting for a suspected wolf vs a suspected cobbler, it's very useful to decide for yourself which baddie you think is which.

Originally Posted by Kath

So Pitch, Lottie, Inzil, Brinn (Brinn quite vociferously!) are firmly against the no lynch. And Pitch seems to feel Legate is the instigator of it, but really I feel that honour goes to G55. I think I'm reading Legate's comments as still with a real vote, whereas G55's suggest no actual vote. And then G55 adds to that focus on Legate.

So was G55 just putting the idea out there to see who would bite? She specifically states here (post 38 - I cannot work out this quoting thing) that she isn't in favour of her own idea. Now, Day 1 discussion can be tough. I mean look, it's her idea that's meant I can really write anything, so on the one hand this is brilliant. It's got people talking, it means there's something to say! But she does seem to be backing away from it quite sharply.

So let me clarify a couple things. There is my Post #26, where I ask a purely hypothetical question, with no intention of going through with any variant of the No Votes idea. Then comes Legate's #31, where he is quite enthusiastic, but as it turns out he was talking about a *different* variation of the idea. Therefore, he was called out on being enthusiatic about a dumb thing, but then applauded for actually being logical when he explained himself later - and why he is, in your later words, the "ringleader" of the idea. And therefore I, when asking the somewhat silly question, did not expect it to evolve to something that could be practically applied, which is why I had to give the *modified and applicable* idea some thought, just like everyone else.

So while you untangle who said what and who is the baddie behind it, try not to get tangled too. It gets messy.


Speaking of hypothetical ideas, this scenario kinda came into my mind last night. So, it's the EndGame, and alive are Wolf, Hunter (hunting the Wolf), and Ordo. Ordo dies. Wolf devours Hunter, but Hunter takes down the wolf. Does either side win?

Originally Posted by Kath

Cobbler discussion came up again. I can't work this out with my shoddy maths. So, the Cobbler counts for the innocents, but if the Cobbler ends up in the QT and their role is known, and the role of any wolves in the QT is also known, does that then advantage the wolves in terms of numbers and help them control the vote - because they all know who each other is even if they can't communicate and so would all just vote the same if that would beat/tie the vote. I was just trying to work out whether trying to keep them in the Game Thread would be a better option, because at least here they don't know who the wolves are. But then their role wouldn't be confirmed either. Ugh.

As in keeping the person you suspect as a cobbler alive on purpose? Certainly, if there is a person you suspect to be a wolf, because the cobbler doesn't count as a baddie in the tally. But surely, in terms of voting outcomes, a dead cobbler is better than a living cobbler when it comes to votes? After all, the QT just votes once collectively, which means the cobbler may or may not affect the choice of recipient. But a living cobbler always gets a vote. And gets to say a lot of things that mess with the village's head besides.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

But you didn't indicate what is that a list of. Of what? Top suspects?

I am confused by your question. Is it that my humour receptors didn't kick in yet, or are you seriously asking if that list is a suspects list - which it obviously is? Like, it's not a list of Boro's groceries. I'm just confused.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

As opposed to unplanned votes?

:-D

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Waitawhat? I only said he looked like a cobbler.

Yes, and that's just one of the problems with that post.

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

Speaking of overcomplicating things, where did this whole idea of waiting for guidance from the QT come from? And why would we 'always have to second-guess' the QT vote, as G55 said in #56? Unless there's a quarantined Seer AND the majority of the Cuties are innocent, the QT vote is just another vote that may be rght or wrong or misguided or driven by evil intentions like everybody else's. No way for us to know.

Yes, that's what I'm getting at. The QT vote can't be treated as a "known dead innocent" (possibly misguided, but still innocent). Because if it's the dead wolves dominating the vote, they know who to vote for. Which actually gives us more information than if the QT is innocently dominated. However, who knows what sort of chaos would be going on in the QT discussions.

Originally Posted by Lhunardawen

++LHUNARDAWEN

You listened! <3

Originally Posted by Lhunardawen

Hmm? Is this a slip?

I doubt it, because I can sympathize. Usually during a game I'll have at least one dream where something really weird happens in the game, and will have to check the thread to make sure it hasn't actually happened. The game does get in your head.


I am at post 104. I have probably crossed with many as it took me a loooong time to write this. Will comment on the rest in a bit, and some brief thoughts to follow.

[Rikae]

Went back to figure out why I thought Mac was wolf-suspecting Legate, and I'm really not sure. I was taking notes, I swear, but only noted that he suspected him for flimsy reasons. This is what he said:

Originally Posted by Macalaure

I find it very odd how very enthusiastic Legate is about this. My immediate thought was the one that Gala had, too: very cobblerish. A wolf wouldn't stick their head out that far, and one would expect an innocent person to be a bit more measured in their response, weighing pros and cons. Not saying a wolf can't fake a careful approach, of course.

So yeah, something lost in translation. I did, and do, find it to be a flimsy reason, at the very least because I like what Legate did there (it got things off and running). Sticking his neck out is fairly typical for Legate if I recall correctly.

Edit: Crossed with Green, Leg, Ka, Gal

[Kath]

Originally Posted by Legate

Seriously!!! That's about the most unhelpful thing ever!!! I mean, I understand you are substituting Nilp, but I'm with Kant on this one. You shouldn't make the example of doing something that might corrupt others to do the same!

I am assuming here that you mean Kath not Kant - but I'm still gonna take it and bask in the glory of being referred to as an eminent philosopher.

Originally Posted by G55

As in keeping the person you suspect as a cobbler alive on purpose? Certainly, if there is a person you suspect to be a wolf, because the cobbler doesn't count as a baddie in the tally. But surely, in terms of voting outcomes, a dead cobbler is better than a living cobbler when it comes to votes? After all, the QT just votes once collectively, which means the cobbler may or may not affect the choice of recipient. But a living cobbler always gets a vote. And gets to say a lot of things that mess with the village's head besides.

I think my train of thought was following the previous one about baddie numbers overwhelming goodie numbers in the QT if they ended up there early on. So say a wolf is lynched Day 1 and an innocent killed Night 2, the QT has even baddies and goodies - the baddies control the vote. The cobbler is lynched Day 2 and an innocent killed Night 3. The QT still has even baddies and goodies and all the Cobbler has to do is vote with the now known wolf for again the baddies to control the vote. But all of that only mattered in the case of a wolf ending up in the QT early on, which was the original thought I'd started at. Also, the villagers would know the roles of those in the QT, and so could be rightfully suspicious of any vote coming from the QT anyway. So I'm afraid it was all rather a thinking out loud exercise. In terms of voting outcomes, as you say, a dead Cobbler is better.

Originally Posted by G55

Yes, that's what I'm getting at. The QT vote can't be treated as a "known dead innocent" (possibly misguided, but still innocent). Because if it's the dead wolves dominating the vote, they know who to vote for. Which actually gives us more information than if the QT is innocently dominated. However, who knows what sort of chaos would be going on in the QT discussions.

Yeah, I think this sums up the ramble above.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Man, can I ship ya folks? (Sorry. Lommy taught me that kind of vocabulary.)

I was wondering if I should worry about the way Boro was buttering Mac up ...

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Before leaving I had spent a lot of time with this on my mind. Now, now, it's not a "list" per se, more my general perceptions of behavior and style. Please feel free to correct if any of this is wrong.

...

Boromir88 (Chime in with whatever floats your boats)

I have a minute right now, so I'm gonna go ahead and talk through my impressions on Boro so far. Boro is a bold player, especially as a wolf, in my experience. I'm getting a strong "brewing potential" vibe from Boro so far today - a sense of "big, bold plays may be coming" - which could very easily go innocent or wolf, given his playing style. I keep feeling like there's no reason for me to make a judgement call either way until he starts making his moves. I don't necessarily suspect him right now, and I would not vote for him toDay, but I am definitely going to keep an eye on him.

xed with Kath and Rikae

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Ok, they're not lists. See them as tabs...groups of tabs. Any attempt of mental lists scrambled me up so to try organizing I did groups, not lists.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... you know

Originally Posted by Boro

What you must ask though is not "would a wolf stick their head out that early?" but would a Legate-wolf do it? With a pack of 5 there's higher incentive to start out bolder. Because it means you have 4 companions who can throw their weight around and steer it in favor or opposed to Legate depending on how the winds go. Where the rest of us rely only on ourselves.

I highly doubt the pack would come out in force and steer the wheel only to keep one packmember from fenrisizing themselves. Chances are that one of them will bite the dust at some point, and then people will look at their old posts. Such Day1 behavior can sink the wolfship on a later day.

The difference between number of innocents and number of wolves determines how many days we will play. Number of days vs. number of wolves to be lynched. The ratio is more important than the actual pack size.

Originally Posted by Loslote

I've been going back and forth on who I think looks most wolf-like of those three, too.

This is what I mean. I can feel a race between Pitch, G55, and Legate coming up, while the wolves are snickering in the background.

I'm not even saying that there isn't a wolf among them - it's possible - but I don't like the way this is gaining momentum.

Originally Posted by Huin

I'd like to hear from some of the people who think Macalaure is dodgy

Translation: "I'm trying to frame an innocent but I don't want to get my own hands dirty, can someone help me out?"

Originally Posted by Rikae

He does love playing as a wolf, but I think he also enjoys looking sinister as an innocent.

Actually, I usually get super nervous as a wolf and then it shows and then I die. The second part is true though.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

And I jokingly called you out on deliberately summarizing incorrectly. This only serves to sow confusion and derail the village, or give people (you most of all) an excuse to vote based on, frankly, false grounds if the vote is based off this post. My point still stands.

Are you serious or are you joking, then? So far you've started a lot of serious debate and accusations flowing with jokes.

If you're seriously suggesting my summary was meant to derail the village, well the bit about you was meant to see whether you responded with jumpy self-defense and/or whether anyone followed by suspecting you in an opportunistic way, both of which would give me/the village more to go on.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

I don’t have too much to go on, just single posts or comments that strike me as suspicious. If I had to vote now I would probably go for Eonwe or Kitanna.

Eonwes back and forth dialog regarding Legate in post 73 strikes me as a noncommittal day 1 ploy.

Kitanna jumping at Lhunas very first post also seem to opportunistic. Definitely seems overly keen to build a case, even if there is absolutely nothing to go on.

Most people seems somewhat helpful, and unfortunately that makes me see them in a bit of rose tinted light.

[A Little Green]

Originally Posted by Mac

Translation: "I'm trying to frame an innocent but I don't want to get my own hands dirty, can someone help me out?"

This actually isn’t how I read that at all. If anything, Huinesoron seems almost worried about Mac and defends him on more than one occasion. Still within the limits of ordo who doesn’t get why someone is being suspected, but worth keeping an eye on.

I also found Huin’s back and forth with Lommy quite curious, from both of them I should say. Huin brings up Lommy’s flip-flopping, she counters with explaining how she always does this and it’s just her thought process (this is true), he makes a shrewd point on how hiding behind one’s “trademark” habits is a safe place for a wolf to go, then she basically says this is fair as it’s what she does when she’s a wolf. Huin then says Lommy seems to have eased off a bit, and later speculates if it’s a coincidence that she seemed to appear just to defend herself and then disappear again when he seemed satisfied with her explanation. I’m not sure what to make of any of this, but I think it merits more attention than it got.

Originally Posted by Legate

The main benefit of this would be that we could then see who would be "lynched" under such circumstances - and then that could be helpful in tracing the Wolves. Because in "real" voting, WWs are calculating to save their mates and so on. In "dry run", it isn't so clear, and then they may be a bit at loss as to what to do. Would they cast their "pseudo-vote" to "save" their packmate even if it is only a dry run? But what if then the real vote happens and the situation goes the same way and they have to change their vote? They need to provide an explanation. It may draw eyes. Etc etc. THAT was the chief merit behind the theory that was discussed so lengthily here.

I’m still not big on the idea, but this is the most sensible defence of it that I’ve seen so far and makes me feel better about Legate – this sort of reasoning doesn’t strike me as something that would necessarily occur to a wolf.

I want to read back a few pages and see what’s actually going on. There’s been a lot of talk and focus on Pitch, Gal55, and Legate, and that’s fair enough as that whole dynamic is possibly the most substantial thing to have happened so far, but I’m as interested (if not more) in other people’s reactions to those three as in the trio themselves.

[Brinniel]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

This is what I mean. I can feel a race between Pitch, G55, and Legate coming up, while the wolves are snickering in the background.

I'm not even saying that there isn't a wolf among them - it's possible - but I don't like the way this is gaining momentum.

I agree with this. I'm still a bit wary of G55 and Pitchwife (less so of the former), however I don't want to get caught in a trap. I think I will stay clear of this potential mess for toDay and focus elsewhere.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Kath

A Pitch vs Mac fight seems to be brewing ...

*cheers* Fight! Fight! Fight! Fight!

But seriously though, neither Pitch nor Mac have pinged my wolf radars as much as everyone has been shouting. I get the feeling that both camps are largely based on fabricated suspicion.


Ok, and now I'm caught up to my previous posts. There has been so much talk I feel that my eyes are glazing over and I forget who said what already.





Some Brief Thoughts:

Kath seems a bit muddled, but more the innocent-trying-to-untangle-what-actually-happened muddled.

Both Hui and Legate came back with a bit of an attitude of "how dare you not hunt wolves!", which sounds a bit pretentious and pseudo-helpful.
Legate - pinged the radar initially (but more in a cobbler than a wolf way), then seemed quite innocent after an explanation, then started looking odd again. I am missing his wishy washiness. He's too direct, if that's possible. And then I refreshed, and he's wishy washy as usual. You're being wishy washy even in your style of wishy washiness!
Hui seems reasonable on the whole, aside from the "you're wasting the Day! Quick, catch some wolves!" thing.

Boro is still weird as hell but doesn't seem to be so in a bad way.

Pitch seems to be the new bandwagon for suspicion. And I just don't see where it's coming from. However, I still am not sure what he was going on about with spreading the votes across the Day.
Similarly, Mac suspicion seems to have appeared out of thin air. I don't get it.

Zil is actually NOT giving me the Day 1 Lynch voice in my head. And I wonder why. (Which is I guess how the voice works: Zil just can't win with it ).

Lommy seems very relaxed. Too relaxed? Or just I-have-nothing-to-hide relaxed?

Meanwhile, Kitanna seems kind of tense.

I am waiting for a response from Rikae. Being curt is one thing, being deliberately wrong is another. And she just - sidesteps - the questioning from myself and Mac, like that post never happened.

Brinniel seems to post without leaving any impression. I have no memory of what she posted, and will need to go over it. She seems to not want to stick out an opinion too far - but again, I will have to read her posts over again. Doesn't give good vibes.

The Ka is another person that gives me bad vibes. She seems fake-nice. She posts like she's afraid to step on people's toes. She sounds afraid to come near the spotlight. I don't like it.

I am not sure what to make of Lhuna. On the whole, very unhelpful, especially with the vote, but I can see her acting this way as an innocent too. Also not sure what to make of the "buiseness only" people: Greenie and Eonwe. To an extent Kitanna also falls here, but she gives me a more tense vibe.

The others have either posted very little or are super under the radar.
Urwen: what do Maeglin's Elf-eyes see? Or he is secretly the cobbler?
Sally, those links will have to wait till toNight. No time for play when there are so many posts. Aaaaagh!

If I were to vote right now, it would be +- Rikae, for behaviour that stands out the most as wolfish. Obviously, this may change when I see your response, or if a huge flag comes up elsewhere.


Edit: needless to say, xed since my last.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Brinniel

I'm still a bit wary of G55 and Pitchwife (less so of the former), however I don't want to get caught in a trap.

Interesting.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I am waiting for a response from Rikae. Being curt is one thing, being deliberately wrong is another. And she just - sidesteps - the questioning from myself and Mac, like that post never happened.

Could you elaborate on what you're referring to here? So far, I've felt like Rikae has been straightforward and clear, and I haven't gotten a bad vibe from her at all. Also, this:

Meanwhile, Kitanna seems kind of tense.

Strikes me as a non-committal way of leaving yourself open to joining a possible bandwagon later on.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I am not sure what to make of Lhuna. On the whole, very unhelpful, especially with the vote, but I can see her acting this way as an innocent too. Also not sure what to make of the "buiseness only" people: Greenie and Eonwe. To an extent Kitanna also falls here, but she gives me a more tense vibe.

The others have either posted very little or are super under the radar.
Urwen: what do Maeglin's Elf-eyes see? Or he is secretly the cobbler?

Maybe somebody planted a false memory, but wasn’t Lhuna always a bit suicidal on day 1 back in the day ? I wouldn’t read too much into it.

Maeglin is a traitor, so why would one bring him into the fray. To me that is a cobbler hint, I didn’t bring it up earlier because I wanted us to focus on the sick.

[THE Ka]

Originally Posted by Huinesoron

... unless that's the point? I dunno; I'd like to hear from some of the people who think Macalaure is dodgy, see how this post affects their thinking.

Thinking it’s dodgy might be a case of how it’s presented, but I get the impression that is just how Mac is processing or trying to make something to analyze and to do a spot check with the rest of us that they’re working on a theory. Wolves do this, sure, but a lot of villagers do this especially on Day 1 as the deadline is nearing. They appear to be throwing a dart at everything, which granted is a method I suppose if you can make it work for you. Don’t see enough solid evidence to make Mac an absolute bandwagon though.

Would enjoy a little more substance from a few others than Mac, so they’re not drowned out, but I know it’s mostly likely due to that there’s over twenty of us in here trying to talk over one another.

Some are inevitably going to be working on something, refresh the page to post, and see that they’re another page behind. With this in mind you have to sort of isolate posts by individual to who is posting around the same time as them. It makes it easier to see who is contributing, who are they speaking to, how are they speaking to their targets, and who is sort of lurking about them trying to look busy.

I know we keep saying we don’t enjoy lists… but this massive a game I’m having to keep a written log.

So far, I really have no clue on Rune or Lhuna, but I know this is due to their time restraints and I can’t fault them on that alone. I could give them a pass the first Day, but I’d be looking for more substance the second given the material they’d have to look at along with us.

Originally Posted by Rune

Maybe somebody planted a false memory, but wasn’t Lhuna always a bit suicidal on day 1 back in the day ? I wouldn’t read too much into it.

I also remember Lhuna having to step out early in game and to be completely honest, I can't in all consciousness go after someone on that either, because I've done that not once, but twice myself because of outside world responsibilities. One of the reasons I haven't played WW in almost ten years, unfortunately.

Rikae is Rikae, I’m not sensing anything out of their normal play style. I am however, not trying to let nostalgia cloud memory though...

I would like to see a little more explanation from Eonwe on their ideas since we’ve gotten past the fake-vote originator debacle. Have an interest in their deductions.

Originally Posted by Legate

That was as fishy first post as they go. "Everyone is a Wolf, hint hint not me."

Lalaith is kind of a dead end due to the lack of… anything. However, I’d like to know if they’ve read or are simply waiting to do a drive-by post and hope no one is keeping tabs.

Loslote has me curious due to the repeated fanning of compliments to Huiensoron's thinking, but I'm not seeing much contribution outside of agreeing when it comes to Hui's theories.

Originally Posted by Loslote

Strikes me as a non-committal way of leaving yourself open to joining a possible bandwagon later on.

Granted I need to read over Kit's posts more, but... These are some strong pot calling the kettle black vibes.

[Boromir88]

I also disagree with Gal about lists being vague and useless. I personally find them quite helpful; without them it’s easy to stick to talking about the loudest, most controversial villagers and topics and let others fly under the radar completely. This tends to serve wolves better than innocents since odds are at least some of them are among the quiet, less attention-seeking crowd.~Greenie

So to stay away from any more lists. Let me try a theoretical "how Day 1s go (in my mind)" approach.

In general, is it agreed that the "under the radar" group is larger than the "loud/active" group? Is it also agreed that Day 1 voting feels like such a shot in the dark?

In the larger group of "under the radars" there are most assuredly wolves. Larger group, easier to stay on the outskirts. A Day 1 vote for a player in this group is low risk, but low reward. Because a lot of the "under the radar" Day 1 behavior is also a sign of ordo villagers who don't have much to say, due to a lack of Day 1 information. And they are forced to wait for information to go on.

Then there's a smaller group of "loud/active" players, and the "under the radars" need this group to stir conversation/discussion. A day 1 "shot in the dark" vote for someone in the smaller group is higher risk, but also higher reward. It's a smaller group so better percentage the shot hits a wolf. Higher risk though because that shot could also inadvertently hit a gifted.

Sometimes I'm in favor of the higher risk, sometimes not. In general I try to follow a "let the active players duke it out and lynch each other" and leave the under the radars to the gifteds, to whittle down and figure out. Because as the days go on, even the "under the radars" have to step out and leave a record.

On a separate note. In a matter of personal taste, the cobbler is my favorite role to play. I guess there's that bit of cause mischief in me that I really enjoy. I don't think anyone proposed lynching a suspected-cobbler over a suspected-wolf, but agree with the sentiment that it's helpful to point out cobblerish behavior. At the end of the day the cobbler doesn't know any of the wolves, so in their own nefarious scheming they could in fact be more harmful to outing wolves than actually helping them. In one way or another the cobbler is the most beneficial when sacrificing for the pack (counts as an innocent lynched). So, it's really not beneficial to lynch a suspected-cobbler.

I read the Lommy's and other posts of "well that's a cobblerish suggestion" as not to say "let's lynch the Legate-looking cobbler" but "Let's take this suggest plan with a grain of salt/diversionary tactic."

Edit: Much cross-posting

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Kitanna

In the whole Legate, G55, and Pitch discussion I'd wager there's a wolf hidden, setting up two innocents to take the bait. Yet each time I read back, I switch who I think is most likely the wolf.
I thought Legate might be the innocent party until post #88
Something about the whole post feels, I don't know, contrived? I can't place my finger on it. Like G55 it feels like he's distancing himself from the fake DL, fake vote discussion.
I'm finding it hard to explain why this sets me off, but I'm going to try in the most coherent way.
Legate drew a lot of attention, but I didn't really feel many were overly suspicious of him. There's been some talk, but nothing to indicate everyone is convinced and ready to bandwagon. I'd say more people raised eyebrows toward G55 and Pitch, myself included, because of how G55 distanced herself from her idea and how Pitch threw it all into Legate's lap. In all that, Legate did look like a misguided, attempting to be helpful innocent. But maybe that's how he wants to be viewed? He's been helpful, at least, in stirring up conversation. And yet, his list post of his thoughts in #88 just rings of false platitudes and him trying to put himself under the radar again. He came, he made a lot of noise, and now just there with a list.

Okay, this was pretty out of the blue. So in short, now Kitanna started to suspect me for making a list?

Plus again posting with what I call "helpful questions for the reader" - I don't like that, because that is exactly the typical Wolf-tactic for baiting the reader into it. As in:
Wolf: "XY did something. I wonder if they are guilty?" Reader: "Hmm, maybe there's something to it. I vote for XY." Wolf: "Oh! I see! There is something fishy about XY! Good that it was not me who came up with that."

Otherwise... I have good feelings about Rune, especially his post #117 seems genuinely innocentish to me.

Originally Posted by Kath

I am assuming here that you mean Kath not Kant - but I'm still gonna take it and bask in the glory of being referred to as an eminent philosopher.

Sorry, I meant Kant I was not aware of you saying anything about it by the time I posted it. But, to be sure, feel free to claim a new nickname! Henceforth, you shall be known as...

Originally Posted by Rikae

I was wondering if I should worry about the way Boro was buttering Mac up ...

Right?

Originally Posted by Macalaure

This is what I mean. I can feel a race between Pitch, G55, and Legate coming up, while the wolves are snickering in the background.

I'm not even saying that there isn't a wolf among them - it's possible - but I don't like the way this is gaining momentum.

Me neither - and not only because I am one of them, but considering this.
Day 1 starts. As expected of Day 1, there isn't much to talk about, people are joking about washing hands etc.
Then, among a few actual posts with content, G55 proposes (the way I see it now) an alternative to "no vote on Day 1" in the form of a "fake vote".
I understand it as a "dry run vote" and propose an elaborate scheme which makes half the people not understand what I meant.
Pitchwife questions it.

Cut to: "one of these three is a Wolf". For what? For suggesting a "bonus vote round"? For baiting me into talking about "bonus vote round" so that they could accuse me of coming up with it? Is talking about this "bonus vote round" something inherently evil, so WWs would assume that they could paint the person who talked about it as suspicious? This has nothing to do with whether the people involved may be innocent or guilty otherwise, but this debate should have zero impact on it?!?

What I mean is to ask: where is there anything "evil" in this debate in the first place? The whole idea seems horribly contrived. It is more like "look, three people started arguing here, let's pick a lynchee from among them". Only normally, when people argue, they argue about whether XY is suspicious or not, or perhaps whether we should lynch nobody on Day 1. Now in those debates, you could at least argue that one side is arguing for something with a malicious intent. But we argued (or anyway, "argued", on top of everything) about something that, I think, is "outside morality and ethics".

I ask everyone who suspects anyone on the grounds of this to reexamine (and ideally, explain) their reasoning.

EDIT: xed with million again

[Thinlómien]

I went away for a few hours to do something else and - oh whatever, it's actually nice to see the village is active! I'm not gonna address individual posts right now but instead I'm gonna make a list:


Leaning innocent

Legate - his stirring the pot seems more innocent to me than not, especially in the light of his most recent post (#125), which has a very genuine vibe to me. In my experience, legatewolf is more cautious than ordoofamonlanc, which makes me not super worried about his behaviour toDay.

Kath and THE Ka - seem like their normal reasonable selves and give me a good vibe so far.

Lhuna - would a wolf self-vote on Day1? The eternal question... In reality, it's probably much safer than starting a bandwagon against anyone else if you're the one who has to vote first for timezone reasons, but I think a wolf might be nervous enough to think otherwise? The tone of her vote post pretty much screams ordo (or possibly cobbler) to me, so I don't think I'm gonna jump on the bandwagon she's trying to create. (Although it's tempting just because it's funny and it would be karma. )


Who knows (I mean who knows about anyone, but these are the extra who knows people!)

Galadriel55 - several things she's said have made me raise my eyebrows a little - especially how she treated the whole no-vote discussion from the start, but I think she might rather be an ordo sticking her neck out à la Legate or else the cobbler, and in either case probably not who I want to concentrate any more toDay than we already have.

Mac and Rikae - both of them seem like their usual innocent selves, but something's going on in there. I wouldn't be very surprised if one of them turned out to be a wolf, but the question is which one? Originally Rikae seemed very innocent to me and Mac like a shadowy troublemaker, but towards the end of the Day the roles have somewhat switched around...

Greenie and Inzil - both seem kinda creepily nicely cool and collected and reasonable and I don't really suspect them but I know better than to trust them without more material. They're always like this regardless of the role.

Lalaith and Urwen - ok I might have grouped them together for funsies, but it's true neither of them has given me enough material to work on, so nothing to say yet.

Brinniel and Eönwë - here's the thing. They both seem(ed) to consider me (someone I know is innocent) and THE Ka (someone who seems innocent to me) innocent and besides I more or less agree with most of what they've both said, so that seems a little too good to be true to me. Then again, with the same logic I might as well suspect myself. And if this wasn't confusing enough, then Eönwë already pointing out Brinniel thinks uncannily similarly to him (about me & Ka) brought this to a whole new level for me. Anyway, if I had to make a judgement - Eönwë's overall tone seemed pretty genuine, while Brinniel seems more sinister.

Sally and Shasta - they seem to have posted but somehow they both completely flew under my radar??


Shady

Huinesoron - I'm wondering how much benefit of doubt I should give them because they haven't played 'downs ww *so* much (and I think we played together once maybe?) but something about their reasoning feels very alien to me. I know I'm innocent and I personally think I also act quite innocent so their suspicion of me seems very fabricated to me.

Lottie, Kitanna and Rune - all of them rub me the wrong way but I would need to reread their posts to put a finger on it.

Pitchwife - seems somewhat too defensive and grasping at straws. Then again, I find it funny how he stands out to so many people as one of the main players of toDay (alongside Legate and Galadriel55) when I personally feel like he's been flying under the radar? Meaning, I somewhat smell an "easy target" the wolves would be happy about...

Boro - he's really weird in this game. Yeah yeah, maybe he's just happy to play again. Or maybe his playing style changed over the years when we were not playing. But I'm mostly worried about the fact that he's not half as confrontational as usual, but instead posting long introspective rambles where he conveniently doesn't have to go toe-to-toe with anyone.


edit: xed with #136 and onwards

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Rikae

I was wondering if I should worry about the way Boro was buttering Mac up ...

Do people like Mac without butter? Wait..maybe I'm confusing Mac for MaC (Macaroni and Cheese). Anyways, continue.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by THE Ka

Granted I need to read over Kit's posts more, but... These are some strong pot calling the kettle black vibes.

Just to clarify, am I the pot or is G55?

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Cut to: "one of these three is a Wolf". For what? For suggesting a "bonus vote round"? For baiting me into talking about "bonus vote round" so that they could accuse me of coming up with it? Is talking about this "bonus vote round" something inherently evil, so WWs would assume that they could paint the person who talked about it as suspicious? This has nothing to do with whether the people involved may be innocent or guilty otherwise, but this debate should have zero impact on it?!?

I absolutely do not suspect anyone on the basis of whether or not they supported the bonus vote round plan. I do think there is merit to Huin's point that Pitch soft defended G55, then when that was pointed out, soft attacked G55. That, coupled with the fact that I do suspect G55 based on other posts, leads me to think that they legitimately might be a wolf pair.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Actually, I usually get super nervous as a wolf and then it shows and then I die. The second part is true though.

Translation: "See how not nervous and sinister I look? Clearly I am an innocent!"

Originally Posted by Rikae

Are you serious or are you joking, then? So far you've started a lot of serious debate and accusations flowing with jokes.

If you're seriously suggesting my summary was meant to derail the village, well the bit about you was meant to see whether you responded with jumpy self-defense and/or whether anyone followed by suspecting you in an opportunistic way, both of which would give me/the village more to go on.

It was said in a joking tone, but I was dead serious about you being inaccurate and exaggerating. The most inaccurate thing about Mac you've addressed as an "oops, don't know how that got there" which sounds innocent but is still EXTREMELY unhelpful, since it sticks incorrectly in people's memories. When did Zil cast accusation on Legate as being a wolf? Find me that post, please, because I don't see one. What you said about Lommy - seriously?

I get that it's been part joke, but it's also so dangerous to half-seriously summarize things with such blatant exaggeration and inaccuracy, because again this is how it sticks in people's minds. Moreover, it's how people (especially yourself) can easily justify votes and suspicion later on - based on incorrect summaries. I can argue about the statements involving me as well, except that would be biased and there is sufficient to be said without it; the exception is the first statement, cause I can't recall where I "concluded" we need to lynch a wolf (I recall Lommy's post that you refer to but not mine).

So yes. A subtle diversion / tweaking of how people remember the events is not at all beyond your posts' potential achievements. Throw some unsupported shade on people, then dismiss half of it as a joke and half of it as an oopsy daisy, and the post gets forgiven but the shade remains. Actually, it was so bombastically inaccurate I am surprised only Mac called you out on it except for me.

(for ease of discussion for everyone else, we are both talking about #69.

Originally Posted by Brinniel

I agree with this. I'm still a bit wary of G55 and Pitchwife (less so of the former), however I don't want to get caught in a trap. I think I will stay clear of this potential mess for toDay and focus elsewhere.

Do you have better candidates? It's admirable to make sure you scrutinize everyone, not just the most vocal people. But not voting for someone you genuinely suspect because you think it might be a trap or get messy? This seems to be dancing too easily on the edge of voting whomever works out best for yourself. Brin, can I please request a summary of who you actually suspect?

A Brin-read to come later if I have time. It's gotta be done. You were under my radar for way too long toDay, and I can't see what your game is because I barely remember what your previous opinions were, except that they didn't stick out too far to be controversial.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I am waiting for a response from Rikae. Being curt is one thing, being deliberately wrong is another. And she just - sidesteps - the questioning from myself and Mac, like that post never happened.

You crossposted with a response, although I'm not sure what you want from me or what I'm supposed to have been deliberately wrong about.

As for sidestepping, I'm here to catch wolves, not get bogged down justifying the steps I took to do so.

Anyway, right now my fake vote would go to:

++Brinniel

For immediately repeating 2 of 3 names from my list as suspicions, and then backtracking explicitly to avoid getting caught in a trap right after I explained to G55 that my post was intended as a wolf trap. That was ostensibly a reply to Mac saying the group was mostly innocent, but the coincidence is just too much for me to ignore.

I know, these are the kinds of things a wolf would definitely make sure not to do, right? Right. So much so, it could be used as cover. And an innocent doing them coincidentally? That feels like a bigger stretch to me.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

It was said in a joking tone, but I was dead serious about you being inaccurate and exaggerating. The most inaccurate thing about Mac you've addressed as an "oops, don't know how that got there" which sounds innocent but is still EXTREMELY unhelpful, since it sticks incorrectly in people's memories. When did Zil cast accusation on Legate as being a wolf? Find me that post, please, because I don't see one. What you said about Lommy - seriously?

I get that it's been part joke, but it's also so dangerous to half-seriously summarize things with such blatant exaggeration and inaccuracy, because again this is how it sticks in people's minds. Moreover, it's how people (especially yourself) can easily justify votes and suspicion later on - based on incorrect summaries. I can argue about the statements involving me as well, except that would be biased and there is sufficient to be said without it; the exception is the first statement, cause I can't recall where I "concluded" we need to lynch a wolf (I recall Lommy's post that you refer to but not mine).

So yes. A subtle diversion / tweaking of how people remember the events is not at all beyond your posts' potential achievements. Throw some unsupported shade on people, then dismiss half of it as a joke and half of it as an oopsy daisy, and the post gets forgiven but the shade remains. Actually, it was so bombastically inaccurate I am surprised only Mac called you out on it except for me.

(for ease of discussion for everyone else, we are both talking about #69.

Okay, so, let's actually look at this post, then, shall we?

Originally Posted by Rikae

Oh ... hello! I'm sorry, I've just been busy making these masks. They have pockets!

Well, it's good to see that Lommy and G55 have come to the conclusion that we need to try lynch a wolf, er, quarantine an infected. And G55 and Legate have agreed we should cast fake votes.

And G55 and Lommy have decided that Legate is a cobbler, and Inzil and Mac have suggested he's infected?

Seriously, it's interesting how the fake votes discussion evolved, seemingly from a couple of throwaway comments to a serious suggestion. Normally it would be totally pointless, but there is some sense in it as a way to prevent people from lurking and waiting to bandwagon on the QT vote. However, I don't think it's practical, and probably won't be necessary, as "lurk and wait for the QT vote" would become suspicious behavior very quickly anyway.

When it comes to single top suspects vs lists, both have their pros and cons and leave material to analyze later on. Me, I like lists. Here's one, just to get the ball rolling:

Pitchwife
G55
Macalaure

This was still very early on Day 1, and frankly, I am not sure what in this post you think is so inaccurate. Is it a bit tongue in cheek? Yeah, maybe. But I'm pretty sure everything Rikae summarized actually was part of the early banter and tentative strategy talk. If you were a wolf, I could see you not wanting to focus on the other members of the G55-Legate-Pitch tangle, and wanting to try to start up a distracting bandwagon. I honestly don't really see the motivation for an ordo to devote this much energy towards a suspicion that isn't really built on much of anything. If we were doing the bonus vote, I would definitely be voting for G55 at this point.

[Thinlómien]

I find it incredibly funny that for all the scrutiny and ridicule Legate got for championing the mock vote idea a lot of the people are actually doing it?? Oh how the tables turn...

But yeah why the hackle not? I said it wouldn't work and maybe everyone won't do it but for what it's worth, at the moment my vote would go to

+-Boro

for reasons specified in my list post (tl;dr he's shying away from confrontations whích seems out of character and also generally doesn' have the same vibe as usual).


edit: xed with Lottie (not that anyone's really keeping track, are they?)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Boro - he's really weird in this game. Yeah yeah, maybe he's just happy to play again. Or maybe his playing style changed over the years when we were not playing.

I have been just thinking the same thing! And exactly wondering whether it was him or my memory of him.

Originally Posted by Loslote

I absolutely do not suspect anyone on the basis of whether or not they supported the bonus vote round plan. I do think there is merit to Huin's point that Pitch soft defended G55, then when that was pointed out, soft attacked G55. That, coupled with the fact that I do suspect G55 based on other posts, leads me to think that they legitimately might be a wolf pair.

Fair enough.

Anyways... I may do a bit of a re-check and perhaps post an actual list of my impressions on everyone - or at least work on one to have it before DL. Since the "fake DL" would be soon, I could reiterate what I said and say that right now, I'd vote for

++Kitanna

But I want to do a full re-check before the actual DL, hope I will have time for it.

EDIT: xe-d since the Lottie post I quoted

[Loslote]

To make it official, my mock vote:

++ Galadriel55

[Eönwë]

Ok, things are looking pretty busy for me today. Let's do a list to gather my thoughts.

Thinlómien - Seems good so far.

Legate of Amon Lanc - I don't like the voting plan, but since then he's seemed pretty reasonable. Of course, he's just as good at seeming (and actually being) reasonable when he's an innocent or wolf. I'm not sure whether I might've missed it, but I can't see whether he's decided to back down from the idea, held to it, or decided to remain silent.

Huinesoron - Never played with before, seems reasonable so far.

Loslote - Can't get a read yet.

Pitchwife - Was originally very suspicious of how he jumped on Legate. Now, looking back, I can see why he might have wanted to argue against both G55 and Legate's suggestions. However, in the now-infamous post, he only really reiterates and slightly expands upon what Lommy, Brinn, and Zil were saying, which might make his post the pseudo-useful post he was accusing Legate of. More recently (#100), he's attacked Mac for seemingly being hyporcitical/jumping at any excuse to attack. Unfairly attacked and therefore suspicious innocent or frantic wolf? Not sure.

Kath - seems quiet but ok so far.

Galadriel55 - I don't actually think she's very suspicious overall. However, how others have acted towards her makes it look like maybe people were trying to get her out of suspicion's way (by pinning the fake-voting on Legate, etc.), so that does make her suspicious and may implicate her in future if they're evil.

Lhunardawen - Really not enough to go on yet.

Inziladun - I'm also firmly in the 'usually has a strong urge to lynch Zil on Day 1' group. I'm not feeling it as much as usual this time, which has me concerned. But I don't think I'd vote for him toDay.

Kitanna - Not enough to get a good read yet.

A Little Green - Not enough to get a good read yet.

Boromir88 - Too much talking about things that don't seem that helpful for me to feel comfortable. But then this is normal Boro, at least as I remember his play-style.

Urwen - Nothing substantive yet.

Lalaith- Not enough to get a good read yet.

Brinniel - I really can't tell how I feel about her at this point, which is concerning.

Macalaure- Not sure whether I'm actually suspicious of him or just have heard that he's suspicious so many times that I've started to believe it.

Rikae- Not sure why she let Lommy off the hook in her initial suspicion list.

Rune Son of Bjarne - Interesting to hear him admit that he usually suspects me without much cause; that might partially explain why I usually suspect him, and this game is no different. Probably not enough to vote for him though. At least do far.

THE Ka - Seems good so far.

Satansaloser2005- Not enough to get a good read yet.

Shastanis Althreduin- Not enough to get a good read yet.


One interesting (maybe 'out-there') idea: What if G55 and Legate are both wolves? In this scenario, G55 made a throwaway comment and Legate saw the violent backlash and rushed in to make it seem more palatable, only to have the idea pinned to him instead.


Note: I can see that page 4 is filling up rapidly, but haven't read it yet.


edit: fixed formatting, finished one sentence.

[Huinesoron]

Am now stuck on my phone, so this is going to be a bit fractured.

Originally Posted by G55

Speaking of hypothetical ideas, this scenario kinda came into my mind last night. So, it's the EndGame, and alive are Wolf, Hunter (hunting the Wolf), and Ordo. Ordo dies. Wolf devours Hunter, but Hunter takes down the wolf. Does either side win?

Is it just me, or is hypothetically contemplating possible Wolf victories not entirely the action of an innocent villager?

Originally Posted by Mac

I'm not even saying that there*isn't*a wolf among them - it's possible - but I don't like the way this is gaining momentum.

We're, what, three and a bit hours from deadline? There's been a few other suspicions around, but I haven't seen anyone (Besides maybe you, but see below) strike more than one or two people as dodgy other than on general feel. The GLP has kind of drowned the rest out; I think the best evidence we have on everyone else might actually be their reactions to it all? I'll try and have a look later.

Originally Posted by Mac

Translation: "I'm trying to frame an innocent but I don't want to get my own hands dirty, can someone help me out?"*

To be honest I still lean against you being a wolf. I'm willing to be persuaded by the evidence - but I was mostly hoping for a wolf to stick their neck out too far in manufacturing said evidence.

It does look like I over-read the amount of discussion there was(n't) of you, so I think that's probably a blind alley.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

Huin*then says*Lommy*seems to have eased off a bit, and later speculates if it’s a coincidence that she seemed to appear just to defend herself and then disappear again when he seemed satisfied with her explanation. I’m not sure what to make of any of this, but I think it merits more attention than it got.

By 'eased off', I mean that her explanations struck me as less suspicious in presentation than her previous behaviour. But as she says - sometimes she leans into the stereotypes, so presumably she can lean out of them at need?

Originally Posted by A Little Green

I’m as interested (if not more) in other people’s reactions to those three as in the trio themselves.

This. (I think already said this in this same post, actually.)

Okay, I think I've caught up with the ever-moving present. I feel like the Day has split into three phases: phase 1 being the actual discussion over the fake votes idea, phase two being reactions to and suspicions over the parts people played in it, and now phase 3 is suspicion over those reactions. I want to reread phase 2, because I think phase 4 (analysing the current suspicions) is likely to be too deep down the rabbit hole: we'll all be looking at so many levels of info that you could form a plausible suspicion of everyone!

hS, as of post 149

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Translation: "I'm trying to frame an innocent but I don't want to get my own hands dirty, can someone help me out?"

This in reply to Hui who was actually wondering where the Mac-suspicion came from (as Greenie has explained).

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Actually, I usually get super nervous as a wolf and then it shows

Hmmm...

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Loslote

Could you elaborate on what you're referring to here? So far, I've felt like Rikae has been straightforward and clear, and I haven't gotten a bad vibe from her at all. Also, this:

#69.

Seriously? No one else except Mac has noticed anything wrong with that post? And Mac only noticed it because he was the one falsely accused. Notice how no one else picked up on the incorrect information. Don't you find it scary manipulative to have thoughts put into your head like that? Village, what is wrong with you for blindly eating up what you're fed, regardless of Rikae's actual role or intention?

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Maeglin is a traitor, so why would one bring him into the fray. To me that is a cobbler hint, I didn’t bring it up earlier because I wanted us to focus on the sick.

Because Maeglin is Urwen's latest character obsession. She will find a way to bring him into any discussion. See like all of her posts in the last year.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Me neither - and not only because I am one of them, but considering this.
Day 1 starts. As expected of Day 1, there isn't much to talk about, people are joking about washing hands etc.
Then, among a few actual posts with content, G55 proposes (the way I see it now) an alternative to "no vote on Day 1" in the form of a "fake vote".
I understand it as a "dry run vote" and propose an elaborate scheme which makes half the people not understand what I meant.
Pitchwife questions it.

Cut to: "one of these three is a Wolf". For what? For suggesting a "bonus vote round"? For baiting me into talking about "bonus vote round" so that they could accuse me of coming up with it? Is talking about this "bonus vote round" something inherently evil, so WWs would assume that they could paint the person who talked about it as suspicious? This has nothing to do with whether the people involved may be innocent or guilty otherwise, but this debate should have zero impact on it?!?

What I mean is to ask: where is there anything "evil" in this debate in the first place? The whole idea seems horribly contrived. It is more like "look, three people started arguing here, let's pick a lynchee from among them". Only normally, when people argue, they argue about whether XY is suspicious or not, or perhaps whether we should lynch nobody on Day 1. Now in those debates, you could at least argue that one side is arguing for something with a malicious intent. But we argued (or anyway, "argued", on top of everything) about something that, I think, is "outside morality and ethics".

I ask everyone who suspects anyone on the grounds of this to reexamine (and ideally, explain) their reasoning.

That is actually very reasonable and unpanicked defense. However, it misses the main point of all the accusations, which are not about the content of the Votes Debate but the manner in which players have interacted in it. Still, points to Legate for level-headedness regardless of his role.

Edit: xed since my last

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

#

Because Maeglin is Urwen's latest character obsession. She will find a way to bring him into any discussion. See like all of her posts in the last year.

How very convenient!
Okay, fair enough I haven't been around much so I wouldn't know.

[Brinniel]

Originally Posted by G55

Do you have better candidates? It's admirable to make sure you scrutinize everyone, not just the most vocal people. But not voting for someone you genuinely suspect because you think it might be a trap or get messy? This seems to be dancing too easily on the edge of voting whomever works out best for yourself. Brin, can I please request a summary of who you actually suspect?

Between the three of you that have been brought up, I found Pitchwife's posts to be most suspicious. However, I'm second-guessing myself because I'm starting to think he may just be easy cannon fodder for the wolves. I don't find Legate suspicious and reading your posts today, I'm less wary of you.

I honestly do not have time for full summary posts because I do actually have to work as I mentioned before. If I were to pick someone right now, I would say Inzil. I can't quite put my fingers on it, but I'd say it's mostly because he's one of the most frequent posters, yet I find him providing less of substance and just going with the flow. Easy way for a wolf to hide.

If I do have time I may take a look at those building a case against Pitchwife.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

It was said in a joking tone, but I was dead serious about you being inaccurate and exaggerating. The most inaccurate thing about Mac you've addressed as an "oops, don't know how that got there" which sounds innocent but is still EXTREMELY unhelpful, since it sticks incorrectly in people's memories. When did Zil cast accusation on Legate as being a wolf? Find me that post, please, because I don't see one. What you said about Lommy - seriously?

I get that it's been part joke, but it's also so dangerous to half-seriously summarize things with such blatant exaggeration and inaccuracy, because again this is how it sticks in people's minds. Moreover, it's how people (especially yourself) can easily justify votes and suspicion later on - based on incorrect summaries. I can argue about the statements involving me as well, except that would be biased and there is sufficient to be said without it; the exception is the first statement, cause I can't recall where I "concluded" we need to lynch a wolf (I recall Lommy's post that you refer to but not mine).

So yes. A subtle diversion / tweaking of how people remember the events is not at all beyond your posts' potential achievements. Throw some unsupported shade on people, then dismiss half of it as a joke and half of it as an oopsy daisy, and the post gets forgiven but the shade remains. Actually, it was so bombastically inaccurate I am surprised only Mac called you out on it except for me.

It was indeed an exaggeration and over-generalization to see how people reacted, and you are certainly reacting.

Inzil agreed with Mac. At least that's how I read "Hmm. Perhaps."

If people are basing their votes on my comments a couple hours into day one, none of which I'm even using to support any suspicions, I don't know what they're doing. The only suspicion I even hinted at with any of that was of you, for subtly encouraging a plan/topic of conversation and then suspecting the person who pushed it forward.

That, in itself, isn't necessarily suspicious, but was enough to make me want to take a closer look. Which I did, and continue to do.

And now I'm really done with this topic.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

You’re arrested for Gate-breaking, and Tearing up of Rules, and Assaulting Gate-keepers, and - errr, that is, you're accused of Generalizing, Exaggerating, and Deliberately Misinterpreting and Misrepresenting Other Posts. I challenge you to defend your statements!

Actually, you know what?

What was I supposed to be deliberately misrepresenting? G55, you never did answer that.