[Boromir88]

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.~Agan

Agan you're right.

I don't know what you mean by a "good" case, but of course if one never says anything else than "this person is suspicous" then you are little threat. I just want to point out that we where on day 1, there was plenty of time for McCabber to come good and on day 1 extensive cases are clearly overkill and seldom better than a gut feeling.

You are not a threat to the wolves if you convince people about your case and you are wrong. . .and now we have returned to an earlier stage of this discusion: Are more experienced players better at catching wolves.

Rune you're right.

Now can you please both move on?

"But trying not to say it although meaning it because of it would be suspicious is something I don't like, and it looks like it." Dude, help me untangle that clause. What is "it"? If you're worried that I flip-flopped on how to handle my lack of experience, well, yeah, I did. Be worried, I guess.~Ilya

Playing the newbie card is...say you're a wolf, but you're new to WWing, and you use your newbie status to your advantage by pretty much saying "Hey, I'm a newbie, I don't know what's going on."

I believe what Agan was trying to get at is saying it looks like you're trying to play the newbie card, but that would be looked at as suspicious, so you're attempting to imply it...or in other words she's doubting your use of your newbie status as meaning you're an innocent trying to get the feel for things.