[Nogrod]

I was just going through the dAY1 talk, as I noted something of interest - something I had kind of forgot.

In the famous post #30 Morm condsiders the goose tactics (that was somewhat suspected later as giving advice to the actual goose)

Let's think about this shall we:

1. When dead the roles will not be revealed, this includes goose and owl.
2. If the owl proclaims him/herself we will not know of the truth unless we try his/her words.
3. The goose wants to help the Ducks
4. What better way to help than flush out the owl early on?

A strategem I would use, if I were the goose, would be to declare myself the owl on day 3, maybe day 2, and hope that the real owl declares themself. So if you are the real owl and an imposter declares themself, use your discretion.

Then Spm answered this in post #67 as follows:

To be believable, the Goose would have to declare one, probably two, “Ducks“. A wise Owl will remain silent - that should go (and should have gone) without saying. Either the Goose gets “lucky” and a Duck is lynched (in which case the Goose is failing in his or her task) or an innocent is lynched, swiftly followed by the Goose. But by identifying this as a potential risk, you make it more likely that a real Owl declaration, on Day 3 for example, will not be believed. On the contrary, I think that we should believe any Owl declaration. It can soon be accurately, and lethally for a Goose masquerading as an Owl, tested.

So what to make of it? If Glirdan was the goose (on dAY2), he actually obeyed Morm's advice? (But surely Morm vaguely backed it up with the last sentence? I know, Morm, this can be looked at more benevolently too: I'm just testing some Devil's advocate stuff here - if it brings you more true than false to my eyes, I will tell it in the end) If Glirdan was a goose, he totally disregarded Spm's warnings about "bad goose tactics" and did exactly what Spm thought really bad...?