Tol-in-Gaurhoth XX: Wereorc I: The elves cannot hide themselves much longer.

[Diamond18]

How is this too help any of us? Would we not be able to just go back a re-read everyone's post for ourselves, afterall it is only Day 2 and not all the difficult to go back a couple pages? What are your feelings in this player-by-player analyses? It seems to me like you want to look like you are helping when you really aren't.

Naria, I'll be getting to that. That was all I had time for last night. I haven't done post-by-post analysis before so I was trying it out to see what I could find. I was going to do it anyway for my own benefit and since I did it, I posted it. You don't have to read it if you don't think you need to. It doesn't make me innocent, and that's my point about analysis. It's all well and good to do it, but it doesn't mean the person who wrote the analysis is innocent. That's not the same as me saying it should not be done.

Anyway, I just got home from work and finished dinner so I'll be reading today's posts and elaborating on what my review of yesterday told me.

[Roa_Aoife]

Jenny
1st - Nonsense, Agrees with Celuien about shaman dreams, doesn't want to give the orcs too much, nonsense accusations
2nd - Tells people to stop obsessing over the dreams, points out that a general consensus has been reached, says just showing up to say "I agree" is fairly useless after a point. Points out that revealing dreams will start narrowing the list for the orcs of who the Shaman is. Wants to focus on catching an orc.
3rd - Is suspicious of Nogrod, Diamond, and Sleepy
4th - says vote is spread out enough, Votes Diamond for not enough substance


One of the slightly less active people Day 1. She starts out having fun, but then gets serious. Her second post had some good points in it, and she did stay consistent throughout. Beyond that, there's not a lot to go on. Out of the three, she's the most suspicious, but that's not saying a lot. I'm also keeping an eye on her.

[Nogrod]

Well, I have never seen this kind of mass-analysis before! It kind of exhausts even a dedicated WW-fan! There is much that is overlapping, but then again, cross-checking each others analysis is safe - so that the wolves can't twist them to their ways.

But I'm wondering, why no one analyzed Spawn, as s/he (good grief: s/he probably lives under 10 miles from me, and I don't even know, whether she is a he, or he a she...) is one highest in my suspicion list after doing my analysis...

Spawn's attack on Roa was just a case out of the blue (the reasons were pretty bad, if you look at them closer), the arguments against my plan just plain suspicious, and then the vote without anything more ado - from someone who wanted reasoned cases, not hunches!

For the case of shaman dreams, just look at this (not to ask for any merit for my bad idea, but to see the reaction to it)

It is easier to hide a dream into a good case since there will be so many of them around anyway (I hope) that the orcs can't tell which one of the arguments is based on a dream. And if the orcs should kill the one who had the dream, we shall see easily, whom that person dreamed of.

Now this is just pure maddness! No reason at all! But very good tactics for the orcs, if people believed this... It's nice, if the orcs don't know, which defence came from a dream, but then neither will we have an idea about the dreams, and us villagers will waste them with all the probability. This shaman system puts us in disadvantage already: why should we give the orcs still more to play on? And how could we "see easily" whom someone dreamed of, as we don't have the faintest about who living or dead dreamt in the first place? All this orc-propaganda?

Afterwards Spawn backed down on this - as I protested, but still tried to have it on somehow, saying, that the shaman would know, whom s/he deamt of. Surely would, but why on earth would an orc lie about the person dreamt of (and get caught by that) - they should only lie about the status of the dreamt person!!! and that's in no way known by the shaman. Spawn's arguments are bad, but still he tries to wrench us behaving in confused manner?

I'm not against good cases. That's what we will need. But swindling is serious...

I don't claim to have a "case" against Spawn, but would really like to hear Spawn's answers to these questions... (eg. artificial suspicions on Roa + vote with nothing more + asking villagers to play against our own best)

[Diamond18]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

But I'm wondering, why no one analyzed Spawn

I analyzed her, Nogrod. And she is a she.

I didn't actually find her as suspicious as you do, but I'll have to go find her actual posts again because I didn't write much down about them.

[Celuien]

The promised view of Naria:

Day 1:
#25: In character stuff, laments Farael, vows to aid the village against the orcs. Agrees about discretion for dreams. Doesn’t have any suspicions at the moment.
#35: Says orcs will pick off identified innocents one by one if revealed. Agrees that the topic should be dropped temporarily in favor of looking for orcs. Points out that Roa’s second quote attributed to her wasn’t hers. Notes her computer will be gone soon.

Does not return for vote.

Not much to go on (again) from day 1. Winds up just agreeing with everyone else. Can’t go one way or the other on suspicion of her.

Day 2:
#110: Celebrates Ranger’s good job. Apologizes for missing vote due to computer issues. (Believable and consistent with #35.) Still doesn’t suspect anyone.
#114: Finds Diamond’s posts conflicting with themselves regarding the helpfulness of analysis. Thinks Diamond may be trying to look helpful while not really helping.

And that’s it so far. Pending further developments, I don’t know what to think of her. But this situation seems fairly usual. There’s nothing overtly suspicious about her. I’ll add her to my watch list just because I don’t have much to go on yet. And I want something to go on.

See you in a few hours.

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

But I'm wondering, why no one analyzed Spawn

I'm hesitant to voice my suspicion of Spawn, since I'm not sure if I'm being objective. (She did vote for me after all.) But Spawn's case has left me basically confused. Especially her making a big deal out of my nonsense response to Jenny's nonsense accusation, when others had done the same thing. I'm afraid I don't understand what the problem is.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Diamond18

I analyzed her, Nogrod. And she is a she.

I didn't actually find her as suspicious as you do, but I'll have to go find her actual posts again because I didn't write much down about them.

Thank's Diamond! Someone from the other side of the globe telling which sex someone living "next door" to you is... Could be called the "information society" - or do you Americans still use the term "Information Super Highway"?

I guess most of my suspicions on Spawn relate to the fact, that I see her playing selfcontradictory and with orc-helping ideas & still being not suspected by anyone... That is good gaming, and therefore very worrysome...

I hope, I will have better cases as the night crawls on.

Good Night (RL)!

[Legolas in spandex]

I guess she is a bit peculiar. I posted. Dunno if I'm too late.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Legolas in spandex

I guess she is a bit peculiar. I posted. Dunno if I'm too late.

No you are not! Welcome!

You have approximately 20 hours to play! Go for it Legolas (I retreat to RL sleep, but will be back too, before the day ends)

[Celuien]

Originally Posted by Legolas in spandex

I guess she is a bit peculiar. I posted. Dunno if I'm too late.

Definitely not too late! About 11 hours remain now...

Good to see you here!

On to other matters...


Azaelia:

Now, if I was an orc, I wouldn't put a fellow Orc's name on the innocent list with only my own alongside. It's not good for the group mentality: what if something happened and I was lynched...then someone might connect us, and we'd be out two. But I am no orc. Which means (hopefully) that Spawn isn't one, either.

True. It would make more sense for an orc to make an "innocent" pair with an innocent, though (knowing this) I wouldn't put it past a bold orc to point out a second member of the pack on an innocent list. Bluff and double bluff.

Actually, your being innocent doesn't mean that Spawn is or isn't. I've been throughly fooled by many a clever *coughSaucepanEomercough* wolf recently.

Your defense feels genuine, and I can believe bad luck in a guilty appearing voting position. I eagerly await the larger analysis.

*~*~*~*

I'm not sure I understand the suspicion of Spawn based on her vote for Roa yesterday. There were some odd things about Roa, though I tend not to see them as particularly serious, and Spawn did explain being short of time for further explanations at the time of her vote. I don't really suspect Spawn, though my respect for her usually excellent instincts as an innocent could be coming into play. I'll watch and review, and try to be objective.

I'm leaning more towards trusting Grendelien. Quite an interesting post...

I was going to analyse Sleepy, but I'm waiting for toDAY's posts since all I'll find from yesterday is my annoyance at late Nilpishness.

[Sleepy Ranger]

As promised I shall behave today. First things first, good guess Mr. Ranger. Keep up the good work.

Alas! I seem to have landed in a spot of real-life trouble so I'll be out most of the day but no worries since I'll spend at least an hour or two with you folk till the deadline.

Regards,
'King of Quotes' Sleepy Ranger

[Diamond18]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Thank's Diamond! Someone from the other side of the globe telling which sex someone living "next door" to you is... Could be called the "information society" - or do you Americans still use the term "Information Super Highway"?

Some might, I think it's a hackneyed phrase. Check the photo page, she's on there and she doesn't look like a boy.

I guess most of my suspicions on Spawn relate to the fact, that I see her playing selfcontradictory and with orc-helping ideas & still being not suspected by anyone... That is good gaming, and therefore very worrysome...

I can see what you mean about the comment on us easily being able to tell from the dreamers' posts who they dreamt of. I guess I mostly assumed that she was thinking that when a dreamer died their role as a dreamer would be revealed, like with the Seer. But I don't think that will be the case, will it? We won't know once a person dies if they ever dreamed or not. Or will we? I'm whipping myself into a froth of confusion, now.

[Caranlondien]

Caran I find suspicious. She voted for me because other people were suspicious of me, which seems a lot like bandwaggoning to avoid having own opinion. She also thought Sleepy was more substantial than me, and in my view Sleepy was just weird and off the wall, stirring the pot and hardly substantial by anyone's measure of substance. I'd like to know what exactly tipped the scales in that matter.

Diamond, I voted for you before you gave your response defending yourself; and, after reading that response, I do tend to believe you innocent. Also, I didn't base my vote on thinking that Sleepy had posted more substantially than you; I voted for you over him because where he was quiet, you were loud without saying very much at all. I find unhelpful loudness more suspicious than quietness.

Now, I've only just gotten here, so I have to go back and re-read (since I can't trust any of your analyses ) but here are my initial thoughts: As I've already said, Diamond is no longer the forerunner for my suspicion. Nogrod makes some interesting points about Spawn, whom I had previously been inclined to trust. So I think I'll analyze her first. I'm heartened that we're one up on the wolves in the village-kill to orc-kill ratio. Now come on, people, let's kill an orc!

EDIT: left out a word

[Diamond18]

Originally Posted by Caranlondien

Diamond, I voted for you before you gave your response defending yourself; and, after reading that response, I do tend to believe you innocent. Also, I didn't base my vote on thinking that Sleepy had posted more substantially than you; I voted for you over him because where he was quiet, you were loud without saying very much at all. I find unhelpful loudness more suspicious than quietness.

Okay. I see (from looking over my analysis, the only one I trust ) that when you voted (#64) Sleepy had less posts than me. At the end of the Day, Sleepy had posted 9 times to my 8, and I so haven't been considering him quiet.

I now feel the need to make a few comments about, as Caran has just put it, "unhelpful loudness" or as others have put it, lots of unsubstantial "nonsense."

I should warn everyone that no, I will not be helpful. I cannot be helpful. Why? I don't know anything. I'm an Ordinary and have not received a dream from the Shaman, so I don't know anything. If I was a Seer or a Ranger or a Hunter or whatever, then maybe I'd been in a position to help the village, but as it stands, I know nothing. I really have no purpose in this game but to stay alive and try to figure out who is who. Since it's Day 2 and the village has been active, I've had a chance to form opinions and suspicions, but am otherwise in the same dark corner as any other ordo who has not gotten a dream. So unless I get a dream in the future, I won't be helpful. Don't expect me to be helpful. Do expect me to post more than just in character comments (as is really only befitting early Day 1 posts) but that's about it. (On the same subject, don't expect me to apologize or regret having been in character earlier.)

I suppose despite being an ordo I could still come up with some genius theory to help figure out who the Orcs are, but I kind of doubt it. Not my area of strength. I seem to be good at being really suspicious and becoming the focus of bandwagons, which on the upside should keep me alive during the Night.

[Caranlondien]

Dancing Spawn:

#31: laments Farael; suggests that dreamers leave hints through well-reasoned arguments, so that once a dreamer dies, we can easily tell whom they dreamed of.

My thoughts: I think that the merit of Spawn’s suggestion here depends on the answer to this question: When a dreamer dies, do we find out that they were a dreamer?
In the post after Spawn’s, Nogrod answers that question: No. Since Farael hasn’t contradicted this, I’m assuming that it’s true; When a dreamer dies, we don’t find out that they were a dreamer.

#34: acknowleges Nogrod’s reply; decides to comment on other villagers’ behaviors; points out Diamond for making many in-character posts with little substance; says Roa makes her uneasy because of her “subtle way of excusing random voting”, wonders why Roa took the time to answer Jenny’s in-character accusation; thinks Findeasea’s behavior odd, but excuses her for now as a newbie; thinks Sleepy Ranger isn’t taking the game very seriously.

My thoughts: Her attack on Roa is, as Nogrod has said, somewhat odd. I’m not sure what I think about Roa (that’s a whole other analysis), but as for Spawn, her reasoning isn’t up to par. Jenny made a tongue-in-cheek accusation, and Roa made a tongue-in-cheek response.

#44: votes for Roa

My thoughts: I don't find her dream suggestion that odd, as it could have resulted from the ambiguity concerning dead dreamers. Her attack on Roa does seem odd. But it was Day 1, and lots of people were acting strange. I'll reserve judgment on Spawn until seeing her behavior today.

[JennyHallu]

As I hinted at in my analysis, I find Jenny's posts suspicious, in that her first two seem to contradict each other:
Quote:
#13 Mostly all in character, but talks about having thought about the Shaman dreams and says she agrees with Celuien.

#29 Says she’ll be in and out. Says to quit obsessing over the dreams and agreeing with each other, says to focus on finding and Orc.

In her first posts she talks about the dreams and agrees with someone, in her second post chastises everyone else for doing that same thing as she has done.

In her very next posts she levels accusations, which seems to me hasty for a third post. Very quick to form suspicions and make judgments, and is slightly hypocritical. I am not sure how suspicious to find her though, since part of my suspicion stems from annoyance with the way she is quick to condemn people for not playing the game the way she thinks they should. This isn't necessarily wolfish, it could just be Jennyish. I'll withold making a desicion until I can track more.

I think this deserves an answer, and I'm going to see if I can explain this perceived contradiction, although it almost feels like you're twisting what I've actually said to fit a predetermined idea of me. Post 13 was made, as you can see, 2 hours into the day. It was my first post, and I did mention the dreams. A mention of this new wrinkle in seerism isn't what I protested in post 27. (I assume you meant 27, not 29.) Post 27 was made the next day for me, RL, after I'd slept, and it felt odd to me that in all that time I slept, no one had gotten past the whole dream thing, despite the fact that Nogrod aside, no one had really brought up a new or even different opinion. As for it being only my second post, I have said many times, both here and in discussion, that this is a pressing time of year for people in my line of work. Much prophetizing must be done around Easter, and I'm busy. When I voted for you for lack of substance, Diamond, I did not mean that you'd posted less, I meant that you'd posted less of substance. While you have remedied that today, I still find you pretty suspicious. How else can I vote than by noticing people acting in ways I would not?

I'm off to bed, I think. It's midnight and I have to prove the world is ending in the morning (i.e. do my taxes)

[Azaelia of Willowbottom]

*hurries in*

So. I only have a little while, since it's getting quite late here...but I just got in and thought that at least showing my face would be a good idea.

I should start by congratulating the Ranger on a job well done. And now, to business.

Originally Posted by Celuien

What do I think of this? Somewhat suspicious. I don’t like apologies for votes when they’re based on suspicion. That’s the reason to vote for someone…unless you know they’re innocent and you’re covering tracks. Vote also come at prime bandwagon hiding time. Will watch.

I was covering no tracks. I had no way of knowing that Glirdan was innocent. His behavior was suspicious, and enough other people thought so, too. And I had no intention of bandwagoning. That's just the way it turned out, unfortunately for us. Bad voting decisions strike again.

I realize that a lot of what I did yesterday looked suspicious. Placing a late vote that sealed an innocent's fate. Putting only one other name on the innocent list, someone whose behavior and my own were fairly similar. (which was quite astute a comparison, Diamond. I think Spawn is innocent, but I hadn't really thought there had been such similarities before.)

Now, if I was an orc, I wouldn't put a fellow Orc's name on the innocent list with only my own alongside. It's not good for the group mentality: what if something happened and I was lynched...then someone might connect us, and we'd be out two. But I am no orc. Which means (hopefully) that Spawn isn't one, either.

I'm sorry. I was going to do a larger analysis, but it's almost midnight here, and I am just not thinking straight (I'm not much of a night person). I will be back for more in the (RL) morning.

Apologies for the fact that this post is pretty much a defence of myself. I'm sure that fact will only serve to make me look more suspicious.

[Caranlondien]

Actually, I'm not seeing Azaelia as all that suspicious. She, like Diamond, seems to be responding earnestly to accusations. Just a first reaction, though; analysis tomorrow.

Like Azaelia, my RL time is approaching midnight, and I'll be heading off. Like I said, I plan to do more analysis tomorrow, though. In the meantime, good luck, my fellow villagers, in your orc-finding endeavors!