[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Roa

Aside from the post where he blatantly insists that looking for werewolves is a fruitless activity

You are of course referring to this post. ("Bah! Why bother...")

The point of that post was, to anyone with any amount of understanding, quite clear. I was pointing out that we don't truly have normal WWs in this village because they don't know each other. Therefore normal means of WW hunting cannot be used.

Originally Posted by me

Shhh... don't pursue that subject any further.

You are right of course that the WWs might have been given certain... erm... directions... I don't want to be too specific here... I'd rather not have people start posting their thoughts on the matter (ie giving examples). It might be better just to watch for it, for mentioning a specific maneuver may cause the WWs not to use it, where as if we'd keep mum they might do it and then we can spot it if you see what I mean.

Originally Posted by Roa

Here he actively discourages discussions by the villagers while admitting or even elaborating, if you will, on what the EW may have told the wolves. For example, telling a wolf to intentionally mislead the villagers or act in a cobblerish way. Especially if the EW has faith that this particular wolf would be able to bluff his way out of getting lycnhed.

Of course I'm discouraging discussions about the subject! Because if you say "Let's be on the lookout for this specific WW behavior" the WWs obviously AREN'T GOING TO DO IT THEN!

Duh!

It's not always the right time to open your mouth and discuss something. And you ought to know that.

Originally Posted by me

First, the EW didn't actually pick his three WWs- he submitted a list of names, and three people off the list were randomly assigned to be WWs.

In addition, the "who" doesn't matter nearly so much as the "how many". If I was the EW I'd take six mediocre WWs over two brilliant ones any day. In other words the EW will simply pick people that he thinks are not likely to be scried or lynched. If he picks well then the game is his.

Sure, on one hand if he scries me then I can make all kinds of devilish suggestions etc, but if I'm a likely lynch/scry target then it isn't worth it.

Originally Posted by Roa

In this post, phantom tries to make it seem as though the EW's werewolf choice was random, when it isn't.

No I didn't! You are completely and totally twisting that quote. I specifically said "three people off the list were randomly assigned". So no, I never implied that the choice was random. I said that there was a list. My point was simply that the EW did not get to specifically pick his three WWs.

Next, he states that the EW would probably pick safe wolves rather than brilliant ones

Well, that's kind of obvious isn't it?

"Hee hee, I'm the EW, and I'm going to pick WWs that are going to get lynched! Aren't I smart?"

Come on, Roa. There is absolutely nothing at all fishy about believing that the EW would want WWs likely to survive. You are reeeeeeaally grasping here.

Originally Posted by me

Oh, and as far as deciding who we should try and lynch, the EW or WWs, does it really matter much who we gun for?

In my opinion we're just as likely to lynch a WW gunning for the EW as we are if we were actually trying to lynch a WW. It's not like we have any concrete knowledge to work with. On Day 1 in particular we're just taking a blind shot in the dark. Heck, if we'd purposefully try and lynch the Seer we'd probably have just as good a chance of lynching a WW.

Originally Posted by Roa

A sudden shift after coming back to find that his previous statement had garnered more suspicion (and a vote).

How is it a shift? I'm still holding to my guns that the EW is more important than anything else. I'm just trying to get the ones who are overly concerned about WWs on board with me, trying to get them to realize that even trying to gun for the EW they stand just as good a chance of hitting a WW since no one has any clue who one is anyway on Day 1.

Once again you are grasping.

Originally Posted by Roa

Then he posts some statistics that make seem as though it's better for an innocent to get lynched on Day 1 because it raises our chances of finding a wolf on Day 2.

Okay. Now you are just plain off your rocker.

Here is the post that she is referring to, everyone. Read it. Please, I'm begging you, someone tell me where, at any point, it says anything about it being a good idea to lynch an innocent. All that it is is statistics for the first two days. Nothing more.

And duh, of course if you lynch an innocent you are going to have a higher chance of hitting a WW the next day. Everyone knows that, and I don't think anyone in this entire village is silly enough to think that that fact somehow makes it better to lynch an innocent. Your point makes absolutely no sense.

Originally Posted by me

Really? Hmm... don't you actually know Agan? If so then I'd be inclined to trust your opinion of her. Unless of course you are the EW and Agan is one of your WWs and you are throwing the wolf to the lambs to make yourself look good.

Originally Posted by Roa

But when the same idea is suggested against his favor, he says this:

My comment to Lommy was just so I could say "throwing the wolf to the lambs". If you would've quoted the whole post you would've seen that I draw attention to it on the very next line.

Originally Posted by me

Unless of course you are the EW and Agan is one of your WWs and you are throwing the wolf to the lambs to make yourself look good.

Ha ha... throwing the wolf to the lambs...

Moving on...

Originally Posted by me

But what does Agan think of Lommy?

And what do Rikae and Mac think about each other?

Originally Posted by Roa

He avoids expressing opinions, but encourages others to look closely at each other

Oh, please... you are really being thick now. I suppose you can't think of any possible reason why I'd ask Lommy and Agan about each other, or Mac and Rikae about each other.

Oh yeah, that's right- they know each other in real life!

Originally Posted by me

Suppose that one of our extremely busy members is actually not that busy and has been lying through their teeth on the admin thread this whole time. If that is the case then essentially this game is already over, because we simply will not find them out because of the fact that we have to rule someone out!

Originally Posted by Roa

After all he's said in favor of finding the EW, here he insinuates that finding the EW is fairly hopeless as well.

You are way out of bounds now- taking quotes completely and totally out of context.

The full post can be found here.

As can be clearly seen, I am discussing how to go about finding the EW. I make a point that we must begin somewhere, and that stated RL constraints is the logical starting point. But I add that if the EW has been out and out lying about availability on the Admin thread (which I personally think is unsporting) that they have basically won the game already (through dubious means in my opinion).

How is that saying that finding the EW is hopeless? I'm trying to put forth strategies to look for him!

So what you are saying is a complete and utter lie.

Originally Posted by Roa

So, we can't find wolves, and we can't find the EW, according to phantom.

Another lie.

In post # 37 (which you even quoted) I quite plainly say that there might be ways of spotting WWs. And later I say this- "I'm trying to encourage lots of reactions/talking/etc that I can look at and digest after the day is over and then start hunting Wolves." So I obviously think we can find WWs. And I stated that I had a list of top Wizard candidates, so obviously I think we can find the EW.

Which means you are lying about me.

And then you said this about my EW safe-list idea-

Originally Posted by Roa

Again, why are you so certain of this? What in past history has led you to believe that this is the way the EW will operate?

I believe it because it would be a logical thing to do! Give the WWs a couple of safe candidates to ensure that your odds are high of surviving the first day! It makes sense! You may think I'm a little too sure of it, but sorry, that's the way I am. If something looks like a great idea I just assume people will do it. So sue me.

Originally Posted by Roa

it blatantly contradicts what you said earlier about the wolves being impossible to spot

Once again, a lie. I never said WWs were "impossible to spot".

Originally Posted by Me

But I don't wish to start the lynch mob in your direction either. You're probably not a WW now, but doubtless you will be one later on. I can't imagine the EW could resist recruiting a former EW to his side.

Originally Posted by Roa

Again, the classic wolf line of "You suspect, but I think you're just a misguided innocent" with some flattery thrown in for good measure.

This is not evidence. You are taking a statement that could be said by an innocent or a WW and trying to make it prove something.

Originally Posted by me

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to catch one today. Today is one of the only chances we have of actually keeping the WWs from making an extra kill. Once they have four it will be extremely difficult to get them back down to three, so if we can keep them from getting to four tonight that would really help.

But as I pointed out before, our chances of hitting a WW while looking for the EW are probably just as good as hitting a WW while looking for a WW (at least on Day 1), and thus I do not want to lynch anyone today that people agree is not likely to have applied to be the EW.

Originally Posted by Roa

Here he admits that catch a wolf on Day 1 is best for the village, but he would still rather only lynch possible EW's, since there's likely a wolf among them. The problem with this is that he keeps saying that bold and brilliant players are unlikely picks for wolves, and yet those are the people that apply for being the wizards.

What do you mean, "admits" that it would be best to catch a WW? I never said otherwise. Of course it's best to catch a WW.

Only the "bold and brilliant" apply to be the Wizard? What about quiet and brilliant, or sneaky and brilliant, or wise and careful, or bold and crazy... I don't recall that Nog ever had personality requirements. There is potential overlap between Wizard candidates and WW candidates.

Originally Posted by me

Glad to hear it. Really, the things I've been saying all along have a huge amount of truth in them. Perhaps it is uncomfortable to hear, but you cannot pretend that I am showing the situation for anything other than exactly what it is, even if I am doing it in a fatalistic manner. It ought to at least help everyone make sure their priorities are in order.

Originally Posted by Roa

The bolded portion made me laugh out loud. Really, almost nothing you've said is correct. Try a very small kernel of truth with a whole lot of misdirection piled on top.

Whatever. You are the one who has been caught out and out lying. My statistics were accurate. My statements about the rules were accurate. My statements about likely outcomes were accurate. You can say they weren't correct till you're blue in the face, but that doesn't make it so.

Originally Posted by Roa

suggest two possible votees for himself, all of which is drawn from the current vote count

Originally Posted by Roa

yet he still continues to take his candidates from the vote count

Okay, you are being deliberately dense now.

Of course I was only considering candidates who already had votes. I was IN THE LEAD!!

Originally Posted by Roa

For all his talk of voting for the EW candidates, he never lists who those might be

Originally Posted by Roa

and picks Nerwen, whom he's stated has been in top five list of possible wizards (which he never had the courtesy to post.)

Um, I almost don't want to respond to this because it's so silly.

Can anyone think of a reason not to post a list of Wizard candidates?

Oh, that's right, because the GW would be on it too!!

And if you have any faith at all in your list, you'd realize that by posting it you might just be helping the EW to find the GW that much quicker!

Yeesh... I'm surprised you haven't asked me to post a list of who I think the Ranger is.

Originally Posted by Roa

and doesn't even bother to express suspicion in anyone's direction

Oh, yes, because yesterday we had so much to go off of for determining guilt and such. *rolls eyes yet again*

Today we do have something to go off of, and if you look back I come out with suspicions don't I, so all this business about me not stating suspicions holds zero water.

Originally Posted by Roa

The classic "I'm not a werewolf" line followed by downplaying the idea of the EW picking a cavalier wolf. The light attitude he keeps using towards everyone who suspects him seems terribly forced to me, as though he's diliberately trying to not be jumpy.

You just think that because you're trying to paint me as a WW. If someone thinks I'm innocent then my reactions look just fine.

Originally Posted by me

But once past the opening couple days- that is when you'd want to convert me.

If I was a WW I would show up mid-day and try not to rock the boat too much on Day 1. Wouldn't you?

Originally Posted by Roa

Since when has phantom ever tried to "not rock the boat," ever?

I think we can agree that there are different degrees of "rocking the boat", and different ways in which it can be done for Wolvish purposes.

And as far as me constantly posting a vote count- it was kind of important to me seeing as I was on the chopping block.

In addition someone actually thanked me for it and so I just continued doing it.

What, you are suspecting me for doing something helpful?

Anyway, to sum everything up, this was one of the worst put together attacks on me I've ever seen, full of gaping holes, misquotes, and completely false conclusions that directly contradict text that is there for everyone to see.

If you are innocent Roa, please put aside your pride and reread this post with an open mind and see the logic within it.

Though it's getting tougher and tougher to believe that you are innocent after that. It was just so incredibly wrong. More wrong than I think an innocent Roa is capable of being.