[Coppermirror]

Originally Posted by Kath

What point exactly? The Inzil one? If so explained above, if not please elaborate.

Originally Posted by Kath

OH! Oh I have just noticed that I am completely wrong! It was not Inzil that had that sentence about the traitors at all, it was Cop! Sorry Boro - no wonder you were confused.

Yes, it was the point about Inzil which looked odd there. So your explanation for it is a combination of thinking that it was overdone for Inzil to mention invisibility in two posts as he did, and a mistaken belief that he said a line he didn't. Although in the actual post where you detailed your suspicion, the attributions were clear and quoted in your own post right in front of your speculation, so I think it would be difficult to have been mistaken about the latter.

I find it strange that Inzil reminding people about their invisibility would be taken first and foremost as a likely hint from a Sorcerer-Inzil to members of his pack. The same goes if it's true that Kath was mistaken about attributions and what bothered her was my banter on the topic. If saying anything about invisibility is really that suspicious, I have to wonder why Kath doesn't find my specific reminder toDay to Nerwen about her invisibility to look really bad. (Could Nerwen and Kath be part of a pack?)

Originally Posted by Kath

But, in which case, my paranoia about somebody (and I am now thinking it likely to be Cop) picking up on Boro's all but throw-away remark has grown.

That's interesting, because I don't think a remark that is part of someone's rationale for his vote and one of the two points he thought was most suspicious is what I'd call "all but throw-away". You do seem to be distancing yourself from your remark at #54. Blimey if I can tell whether it's sorcerous distance.

Let's see, before I get back to my analysis I think there were a few more things that people were asking me.

Originally Posted by Kath

Then her first post today:
#106 A pity about Legate. I can see how that happened now and I really should have known better.
I would very much like an explanation of this sentence.

Legate looked okay to me aside from the one point that looked really bad, which meant that there was a risk of him being a confused innocent who had just failed to explain himself. In retrospect it would have been better to give him the benefit of the doubt for the Day. All the same, I don't regret placing that vote, because Legate was still the person I suspected the most at the end of that Day.

Originally Posted by A Little Green

I'm pretty sure you're right about what she meant. Interestingly though, what you do not mention is that Lommy, too, switched quickly to stronger suspicion after your #75.

And I find it interesting that you think that that point about Lommy was something I should have mentioned when explaining what I think Holby meant when she was saying it looked as if you and Legate were bandwagon jumping.

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

Given that Cop herself was in the running for the lynch, it's hard to suspect her for trying to push Legate ahead of her. However, I am a bit curious as to why Cop didn't simply take the "self-preservation" out.

I considered voting for self-preservation. However, before I voted, the only person I was tied with was Kath. Although I thought that Boro had a point, it wasn't enough for me to vote for her. Also, Boro had posted very little, which left me unable to make any sort of conclusion about his guilt or innocence. My suspicion of Legate was much stronger.