I'd possibly die laughing if
phanty and
Ang were both cobblers.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fea
The point is more that if we spend all of our time asking if Shasta was the seer or not, we won't be looking for other seer hints, we won't be searching for wolves, and we'll blow an entire Day talking about something that all boils down to the wolves taking the easy way out on choosing a kill.
|
And if we don't talk about it, we ignore all the evidence we have.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fea
Even without knowing the roles of the people we lynch, we can still ascertain the patterns of voting that led to lynches. For instance, phantom voting to avoid a double lynch even though it meant he didn't vote for his stated suspects makes phantom look good, because he could have just let multiple people die, but did not do so. The role of who died is irrelevant, the point is that phantom prevented a group lynch. That makes him look good.
Mithalwen, on the other hand, for attempting to provoke a multi-lynch, looks pretty bad.
Who voted for Manwe and what were their reasons? It doesn't matter that we don't know who he is, because we still have a traceable set of actions that led up to his departure and relocation.
Shasta. We don't know his role, but we know that he's probably not a wolf (because, let's face it, I doubt the wolves would try suicide if I wasn't one of them, offering it up). Therefore, we can look at reasons why not-wolf-Shasta would be targeted at Night. We can look at the people he interacted with. Or we can shrug it off and call it a random kill job.
The point is that we are still capable of identifying pieces of information and analyzing them. We just don't have all of the information handed to us.
|
Yes, I see. But there's still also evidence on Day1, too, especially in the end of it (forming voting patterns, alliances, skirmishes, possible hints in banter etc).
edit: xed with
Nog who sounds really rather scary!