Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kath
Greenie though, I don't think that Legate is being problematic with his explanation of the Rule of Three. That 'rule' suggests that one of the first three posters must be a wolf. Legate does not say that, but says that sometimes a bold wolf may be an early poster. Therefore one of the first three posters*may*be a wolf but it does not necessarily hold that they*are*a wolf. At least that's how I read what he is saying.
|
Actually what he said was
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Legate
I think I recall it happening very often.
|
and
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Legate
But I was mostly explaining and then using my experience to point out that actually WWs*might*very often post among the first people, and giving reasons why they might do it if they are around.
|
Rather than "sometimes a bold wolf might", it's "wolves very often do" which is a different argument entirely. But anyway, I guess we've said enough about
Legate and the Rule of Three for the moment.
Concerning the number of wolves and the speculation about it:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nerwen
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Copper
Speaking of those who must come to their senses, my memory is strangely cloudy about the details of how the encampment is to deal with the threat we are under. We must attempt to locate the one who is possessed and those whose minds have been taken by Saruman, but what will we do to them when we catch them, and how many of them are in our midst?
|
That last is actually a good question– given the numbers, I’d guess we have four evil ones among us at present, but no doubt the narration will make it clear. |
Knowing that there are actually three, and the wolves presumably knew as much, these two might be interesting. First there's
Copper, who brings it up in the first place which, as I argued before, might point to her innocence as a wolf might not have noticed that their number wasn't actually clarified on the thread. There is something forced about her tone here though so I'm not sure.
Nerwen then - could be bluffing, but if she was, it's a pretty old trick and I'm not sure she'd go for it. Bleh. So much for concluding anything!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Copper
Heeeey, you are impugning my almost spotless record of innocence! Prior to this game my ratio of wolfhood was 1/4. (Now 1/5)
|
I'm also not very comfortable with this "ratio of wolfhood" thing, especially the part in brackets. I always find it fishy when someone feels the need to underline their innocence, especially when under no suspicion at all.
EDIT: x-ed since Copper's
Overall Impressions