Quote:
|
Which is such dumb reasoning based on the pure chance of role assignation. They have the same probability of everyone else.
|
True in theory. And poorly phrased by me -- I should have said something more like the most
likely to be innocent. My reasoning was that
phantom wasn't likely to make the noobs the wolves among such experienced players. It would be like, well, tossing us to the wolves. I may well find out how dumb that reasoning was... we'll soon see. Anyway, you've got to start from somewhere on Day One.
My analysis of
Shorty was sincere, as you will soon find out -- if you don't already know. I certainly wasn't the first to suspect he might be up to something, but I admit some of my analysis probably did help get the ball rolling against him. Still, you'll just have to take me at my word that I had stronger suspicions against others until he self-voted.
I just can't think of any good reason for an innocent to do something like that. This is a numbers game. This may be the voice of inexperience talking, but it seems that it might even be worth risking letting a gifted be lynched rather than offering yourself, or worse,
voting yourself, if you're innocent. I can't think of any reason to do it other than that you're a wolf in a desperate situation making a last gambit to create confusion. Imagine how my head swam when two players in a row did it!
Quote:
|
I'd also like to address this: how can one be considered helpful when one is automatically considered a huge threat and not to be trusted?
|
Well, clearly you have a reputation. I didn't have any preconceptions about you, especially starting out. But it seems to me that if you turn out to be innocent, then you played far too coy a game, unneccessarily drawing suspicion on yourself by hinting that you might be the wolf again and again, making votes for flip reasons, etc. I appreciate that if people are automatically threatened by you in a game, you're in sort of a situation, but from my point of view, you often created confusion and doubt when you could have been more straightforward.
Also, if you're innocent, I think you have to be sure to check your facts before floating theories or making accusations. When you have to correct yourself, it makes you look like you're running stuff up the flagpole to see if someone salutes. Your error on the voting in Day One that I caught today, for instance, really looks bad. If you're innocent, your big advantage is that you
are innocent. Only the wolves need to run the risks of deception and lies. The more careful the villagers are, the easier it is to root out the wolves. Sloppy villagers = a dead village.
And in addition to all that, what can I say -- it's a tough game, I had strong doubts about you, I may have occasionally reached to try to make my points. If the dust settles and we've caught the wolf, we can kiss and make up later. Except you'll be dead. But you see what I mean.
If, on the other hand, you're a wolf, I have to hand it to you for being able to openly draw so much suspicion but still slip the noose time and again.
Anywho, we'll soon find out what's what. The suspense is killing me.