[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Ilya

It was safe, which I guess is why it looks wolfish. I would also propose it looks like a newbie who only wants to stay in the game long enough until she can get the hang of it, and then start alienating people, but I can't decide for you.

Somehow I don't like the way you're playing the newbie card. It looks as if you were trying to avoid implying you're new and therefore want to stay alive. Now saying it would not be that bad a thing, but trying not to say it although meaning it because of thinking it would be suspicious is something I don't like, and it looks like it.

Originally Posted by Ilya

Agan, a "charismatic wolf" would be someone who has a bead on the general suspicions of the reps and would be able to do exactly what Boro did to me yesterday: cast a vote with authority, and convince me to jump on the bandwagon.

What I haven't figured out is what you meant by calling for a method of empowering reps so a charismatic wolf wouldn't get a chance to rule them. What kind of method would you suggest?

Originally Posted by Nog

So how come you tp think that if I act in the same way as you do it makes me look suspicious? What does it say of you?

As might have been noticed by now, I am one of those looking for persons who are behaving or thinking like I could as a wolf, and I don't think it's suspicious that other people try to notice it as well.

Originally Posted by Nog

And it would be an insult if you were an innocent thinking me a possible wolf with this. What are you up to?

I found this remark suspicious (just like I didn't like how Nerwen was offended by morm's suggestion she was playing a confused wolf). Mostly because they both were expressed so strongly. Why should anyone be insulted if someone doesn't seem to think they are as intelligent, cunning, pretty, whatever, they themselves think they are?

Originally Posted by Greenie

Somehow you seem more touchy and much quicker to retaliate to anything that even mildly concerns you.

Better get used to it since I have found it a nice way to play.
And as for categories, if I label people either as Guilty, Innocent, or Neither, do you think it means there are people I consider neither guilty nor innocent? Although the names be like that, it's basically just Suspicious, Not suspicious, and Dunno. If you have three categories and I am in the worst one, I think I have a reason to assume I am suspected. However the thing which caught my eye was that just because I no longer give you innocent vibes, I become worrying. Am I otherwise so suspicious that just those innocent vibes you couldn't put your finger on made you think I was innocent, and now that you don't get them anymore, you're worried about me instead of not knowing what to think of me?
I hope that question made more sense now than in my last post, where it wasn't quite clear.

Originally Posted by Greenie

Just for change, please elaborate on why exactly I am on your suspicion list.

I am happy to oblige (ie read through your posts & summarize them) at some point, although not quite now. However, you eventually ended up being there because of your reasons to be worried about me and the lack of explanations for them.
There are people I'm more interested in than you right now, so you have to wait.

Originally Posted by Boro

and they both thought the death would point towards you.

I can't say I really thought Cab's death would point towards Nog - it was only my gut reaction which I probably wouldn't even have mentioned if not for Lommy sharing it, too.

Originally Posted by Ka

That kill would be too close for comfort for our wolves, since I’m guessing they have at least one at the loudspeaker, one on the floor passing out comments, and the rest hiding out in different voting groups.

Do you have any specific reason to think so?
I've been repeating this to the point of exhaustion in the games I've played, but I don't think it's ever that simple, and I find little use in speculation.

Originally Posted by Ilya

When he voted for Brinn, he said a lot things about her being reason and trustworthly and then:
Quote:...and because she probably won't be the center of attention.

I don't consider agreeing with Brinn on one issue and saying she's usually trustworthy a lot of things. I also think I made it quite clear why I didn't want my rep to be the centre of attention: I'd rather there were several weak reps than a few strong ones. My reasoning included the idea of centres of attention getting many rep votes, which turned out a bit otherwise in the end, though.

Originally Posted by Rune

Anyways this seems to be Aganzir’s style and I must say it annoys me a great deal.

Yeah, it's my style for now. I bet you're not the only person whom it annoys, but that's the way of finding the wolves I'm the most comfortable with.

Originally Posted by Eönwë

So why didn't you stand out from the crowd? Why didn't you try to lynch someone you really thought was a wolf? Here you are admitting to bandwaggoning without a good reason. At least you amit it. or maybe you are just putting it out in the open so that people say that and dpn't think that you're hiding something.

The problem was that there was no one I really thought was a wolf. Besides, being the first to cast a vote against someone can hardly be called bandwagoning. I don't mind Legate's death, but the way it happened - random suspicions coming up, and he receiving almost all the votes in the end.

Originally Posted by Rune

We can all agree that Nogrod have more experience than McCabber, but that was not what he said. . . He said he was more of a threat to the wolves that McCabber, these things are not the same.

Well if you were wondering whether to trust more a person who made really good big cases against people or one who popped in to say "X looks weird... I'll tell more later," which one would you choose? If by saying a threat to the wolves you mean a player who's good at spotting wolves, it's difficult to make a difference between them, but if you mean one who can more easily convince others to think the way s/he does, I think it's justified to call Nog a greater threat than Cab.

Originally Posted by Ilya

However, I do not like the implication she made about a rep not voting and irresponsibility today (521). These aren't sacred offices or anything but reps do have an obligation. As to throwaway votes, it's not a bad way for a shy wolf to act - everything's all tied up, so I'm just gonna go Nader. Or, you know, the phantom and his brand of jokery. I guess, in short, voting is important, and anyone who says otherwise bothers me.

I am sure you are aware that the origins of that rep not voting talk are in a post of mine on day 1 where I treated the idea of possible filibustering when I want to go to sleep pretty harshly, which Lommy found irresponsible and outrageous.
My personal opinion is that a rep should vote, but for the sake of argument I can't help wondering how deciding not to vote would be any different from throwing away one's vote. And actually throwaway votes aren't that good a way for a wolf, since they will be looked at in every case.

While writing this post I was reminded by my stomach that I haven't eaten anything today, except for a loaf of bread in the morning. Therefore I'm planning to have something to eat now. Then I could maybe try to complete my Ilya case and take that look at Nerwen's posts I was planning to.