[Nogrod]

To Firefoot’s criticism of last night’s decision I would comment, that you could try it better yourself in half-an-hour. It’s always easy to be a smart guy when looking from a distance, in a sense of a) examing the acts afterwards with all the time to use b) not having to do it oneself. And I still defend my vote, at least from one point of view: I had more belief in Jenny’s innocence than Sleepy’s or Valier’s. After the first days rampage as a total newbie, she has been much less suspectable than those others. Without our vote last night, she would have been killed. It’s totally another thing, that I’m really sorry about Sleepy: it was his birthday (in RL) indeed! And of course I can’t be sure of Jenny’s outright innocence either. With this situation, it is more or less a question of more or less. One can’t be sure about anyone.

Kind of asking you Firefoot: on what premises do you base your “safe”-list? On what grounds do you give Roa and Mith a status of “propable innocense”? The point being: on what actual grounds do you draw the line between propable innocense for THREE villagers (just accidentally the number of the wolves...), and leave the rest susceptible?

I really would like to hear your points for common consideration.

Anyhow, we need to stick together and really think. We have taken a bad beating to begin with. A really bad one. Now let us join arms! As I said earlier: I do believe our werewolves are quite cunning and smart. I also do believe, that at least one or two of them, propably all three, are playing actively against the very few of us. They are playing a good game, we are not.

So one thing I would like everyone to consider very carefully. Be suspicious of bandwagoneering this day! There are three wolves who can build their case and the mood for lynching an innocent again. So use your brain, not your “hunches” or impressive, succesive case-building.

And I do have to disagree with Firefoot on still one more matter. This is the seer’s best conduct now. The game has advanced to a such a critical phase, that our seer should start giving us a bit more clearer hints. That of course depending on her/his wealth of knowledge. At this later point I agree with Firefoot. But the limits I would set a bit differently. It propably is not so much a question about how many are dead, but about how many wolves / actively participating innocent’s is she/he knowledgeable of, and which links she/he has managed to see on grounds of this information on both ways. If there is a strong case to be made for even two wolves and a suspicion of a third, she/he should propably go on. Otherwise we’ll just lose our days – and at worst kill her/him this night, misled by our bandwagoning wolves! After her/his death we can read her/his texts with enough care to make the right decisions. If it turns out, that either Elu or Gandalf has been our seer, with considerable knowledge of the situation, I will personally strangle them mentally – even behind the curtains of the second death of the WW-game grave!

So everyone at the defence and beware of the wolves among us!

One wish for everyone. Most importantly for you, who post irregularily. Inform us, when is the last time you are able to make your votes. Today it will be crucial! If we don’t kill a WW today, we really are in deep trouble – as we wouldn’t be already...

Cross-posted with three earlier ones (=hadn't read them before sending this one)