Werewolf LIII: The Republic

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by satansaloser2005

Re: Gil. Couldn't agree more. It doesn't help us any gamewise, unless he's trying to hide wolfishness behind not knowing the rules.

Re: Kath. Good to know. Perhaps, though, we could discuss that toMorrow, as we can't do anything about future reps before then? Not to say that you can't let your opinion be known, but I think it'd be better to talk about potential wolves than potential reps at this point. (And again, I'm tired, so if I misunderstand your post in some way please accept my apologies.)


In short, good thoughts. Now what do you think about wolves?

No you did not misunderstand, but you picking Representatives and deciding who to lynch is in some ways related. I have no real lynch candidates, but I do have people that I think would be good Representatives or that I just have a good feeling about. By saying this about Kath, I also say that I do not want her lynched and as such it is part of that debate. . .

The alternative would be that I would be very quiet until I got a proper susbect and that could take a while.
It would also mean that I could not defend anybody from accusations, as my focus would be on their presumed innocens.

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

No you did not misunderstand, but you picking Representatives and deciding who to lynch is in some ways related. I have no real lynch candidates, but I do have people that I think would be good Representatives or that I just have a good feeling about. By saying this about Kath, I also say that I do not want her lynched and as such it is part of that debate. . .

The alternative would be that I would be very quiet until I got a proper susbect and that could take a while.
It would also mean that I could not defend anybody from accusations, as my focus would be on their presumed innocens.

Nope, totally cool, I just wasn't sure what you were trying to accomplish with offering rep choices. Makes a lot more sense now. Thanks for explaining!

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Agan

I found this comment not necessarily suspicious but weird. Is filibustering something you "really have to try"? Aren't there any possible advantages to it? You say the only purpose you can see it serving is chaos-creating, and I think that's exaggerating.

I don't have to try a filibuster. I can hardly see the point in it. I was just thinking that this village will want to try it and I can kind of see why - it's a once in a ww career chance. I think that much was pretty obvious from what I said. And no, I honestly cannot see it smartly serving any good purpose. If you can, tell me, and I even might become a filibuster-supporter.

Originally Posted by Agan

For I couldn't really see any triangle between them. Could either Lommy or Shasta, or both, explain to me where it came from.

I was merely pointing out the obvious: that those three have interacted with each other particularily much and stand out because of that and because of their loudness.

Originally Posted by Agan

Shasta. Don't really understand where that phantom-Boro-Legate triangle came from. It reminds me a bit of Nerwolf's "their interaction makes me think there might be a wolf involved" in some game ages ago.

I cannot see anything that suspicious in Shasta's actions, even though they were maybe a little weird.

Originally Posted by Agan

Legate. I don't know. I just somehow don't like him. I'm at a loss as to why he voted against filibusters because I myself can't see anything wrong with them (if someone is filibustering when I want to go to sleep, then I just don't vote), and his anti-phantom thing looked fabricated (which it probably was), as well as his wavering and 180 turn later on. However, his reaction to Boro's questioning looks rather innocentish.

"If someone is filibustering when I want to go to sleep, then I just don't vote"??? And you elected this person to be a rep? That is... outrageous. If someone has been given the trust to become a rep, it is utterly irresponsible to care so little about the vote. *shakes head*
Secondly, I diasgree with your suspicion of Legate. I think his anti-phantom thing was more like a sort of prejudice that simply wore off. And like I've said before, I doubt a wolf would have made such a 180 degree turn. That would have served no purpose but making him look more suspicious and gather attention.

Honestly, Aganzir's suspicions strike me as rather forced. I think she's merely trying to grasp any kind of behaviour she can call suspicious and make a horrible mess out of it. And she claims I'm exaggerating. How rude. Simply put, I don't think her behaviour looks like hunting wolves, it looks like hunting supicious behaviour. I cannot phrase it so that it makes any more sense, but I hope at least someone can understand that.

Originally Posted by Agan

Err? Your response looks rather empty. About whatever we do here is wolf-hunting, and at least I would consider going through the voting reasons wolf-hunting as well. You seemingly don't.

Ah, see? Again. She's taking something I've said and tries to make it as suspicious as she can. (I know someone who talks as carelessly as me must be an irresistible target... ) Going through the vote reasons is wolf-hunting, yes, but not the same way as rereading the thread, debating and making cases. Maybe I phrased that badly, but I think going through those reasons would be alittle secondary in a village like this where relatively few suspicions have been presented in realtion to the post/ page count.

Originally Posted by Agan

I found only one in my post. I can't speak for Greenie but I wouldn't call her use of positive adjectives great trust, either. If we have to vote early and you know it, why on earth are you telling us later that we trusted her way too much given how much she had posted?

If something frustrates me in these games it's that I always get suspected because people take my personal impressions as twisting of the truth. I got the impression that you trusted her quite a lot given the early phase of the game. I'm not going to continue arguing about the exact truth of this. It's the feeling I got and I'm entitled to it, you may have seen it differently, but frankly, I don't care. I cannot trust anything you say anyway. And lastly, to reply you, I think that's a pointless question. Of course you had to vote and give your trust to someone. I only think you gave your trust rather easily to her exactly and phrased it so that it looked rather easy.

Originally Posted by Aganzir

And I do think you've been exaggerating. Trying to make small issues sound bigger than they are.

Okay, I know I'm getting heated but this is just too much! You cannot say that to me. You're the one nit-picking and making mountains out of molehills all the time. I have no doubt it's wise to question about everything everyone says but when you do that, you can hardly blame anyone for making small issues sound bigger than they are.

Originally Posted by Boro

The question is would a wolf-Legate want to be this obvious, this early in the game? Is he trying to pull a double-bluff?

I've already talked about it, but I doubt he'd want to be that obvious. Of course, he is well able to pull a bluff like that, so who knows. He strikes me as rather innocent really, and I can't see all this sudden suspicion for him.

Originally Posted by Greenie

The triangle thing looks quite bad on him, actually - my guess is that where Lommy referred to a phantom-Boro-Legate triangle she meant that the three interacted a lot with one another and were in the centre of attention, Shasta took it as a suspicion that the three were fellows and grasped it. Please, Shasta and/or Lommy, correct me if I've misread you; but that's how it seemed to me.

More or less so, I think. At least for my part.

Originally Posted by Agan

And when Lommy gets home she will scream and jump up and down and wonder how I can be so annoying as to suspect her every time we play together.

I'm not screaming and jumping because of that, I'm screaming and jumping because your suspicions of me are so incredibly stupidly ill-based and wolvish! Anyway, I don't mind being suspected, really, it kind of makes it more probable to make it through the Night. And lastly, it would be hypocritical of me to be angry with you being like that because I too have fallen to my old habit - suspecting you in return.

Originally Posted by Greenie

Agan - thanks for clearing the Lommy thing up, it makes more sense now. The response doesn't look like the most innocent Lommy, though I still don't go so far as to suspect her because of that.

Now this really strikes me as terribly wolvishly diplomatic. *shrugs*

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Can we assume that Gil's out? His confusion looks pretty genuine to me (however, I haven't played with him much).

I think it looks genuine too.

Phantom's explanation for his Legate-vote makes sense. I don't suspect him right now even though I would kind of like to...

I will go to sleep soon, but I'd like to hang around for a little while and argue with the reps a little more... we'll see...


edit: xed with Nog and Gwath, and Kath, and Gil, and Gwath

[Thinlómien]

Kath - I think we non-representatives should argue with the representatives and comment their suspicions. We should disagree with them and challenge them, but also tell them if we agree with their suspicions. Defend those they accuse but we think innocent, question their trust of those we find questionable. All in all, we should try to make them see what is good and what is bad in their judgement. Of course, we can also bring up totally new cases for them to consider.
We should simply help them make a good choice.

edit: xed with Mith - why do those corpses keep popping up all the time?

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

edit: xed with Mith - why do those corpses keep popping up all the time?

We're all dead here sweetie.... besides my ears were burning

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Kath - I think we non-representatives should argue with the representatives and comment their suspicions. We should disagree with them and challenge them, but also tell them if we agree with their suspicions. Defend those they accuse but we think innocent, question their trust of those we find questionable. All in all, we should try to make them see what is good and what is bad in their judgement.

A good add-on to my post about the role of the villagers and the representatives...

There's been awful little of that critical discussion between the villagers and the representatives. But that's also for us reps to blame as I haven't seen too much suspicions made by the reps either (myself included).

Okay. Now I'm going to go back into the thread.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

There's been awful little of that critical discussion between the villagers and the representatives. But that's also for us reps to blame as I haven't seen too much suspicions made by the reps either (myself included).

Yes that is fair point. I suspect the situation will be better automatically then, but I'd like to see the reps be a bit more active toMorrow before I have to go to sleep. This time, I mostly got to criticise Agan and Boro just a little.

Anyway, argumenting with silly Aganzir is frustrating so I'm going to sleep now....

Vote well, representatives. (You will be held responsible if an innocent is killed. )

[Nogrod]

Oh my... I had a few ideas that had made me wonder while I read through the thread earlier toDay but it seems they were ill-gotten. Like that I had a strong impression that after Lommy and I argued for the benefits of choosing a less known person as a representative there was a wave of points out of thin air made to suggest Ilya was also their choice for a rep but they just didn't act that way because she had been already elected. So they were basically going with the flow and trying to look like they thought similarly with the majority. I really had a kind of a parrot-feeling on that and that always sends the alarms ringing with me. But there was no such a large and unfounded thing to be found... except possibly Eonwë who posted a little after my vote.

He considered myself and Greenie as his representative and as a third option he gave...

Originally Posted by Eonwë

Then there is Ilya, but I don't really know her well enough yet, though she seems innocent enough.

I'm not sure if you get what I mean but that does look suspicious. Of all the people around here he picked the three of us (choosing Greenie btw.) but unlike myself or Lommy who had actually argued why Ilya should be chosen (or anyone whom we'd like to see more of and feel somewhat safe with) he just went with the flow with no explanation of why he thought she could be a good choice, like stating something obvious for a choice of a representative with the "Then there is...".

But I'm not too confident on this. It could go either way.


To other things.

At the moment it looks like on the top of things there are:

The row between Aganzir and Lommy. Argumentwise I'd say Agan looks the more innocent one, feelingwise I think Lommy looks the more innocent (she felt genuinely frustrated - although a wolf might feel the frustration as well to be sure). So I just can't avoid the idea that it's two innocents tearing each other apart.

The skirmish between Gil and Shasta was amusing indeed but didn't tell us much. But just looking at the row it would make me feel Gil more innocent (I don't think he would make such a number were he a wolf) and leaves me quite empty-handed with Shasta. Shasta's enthusiasm to get on Gil could be seen as a wolf finally finding a target - and his retreat from it after Gil got personal would be just wise from a wolf as well. The problem is there's a host of "if's" there.

Legate's 180 (how easily catchphrases are born...) and his involvement leave me as baffled. His defence of himself yesterday was genuine-looking to the fullest but the act of turning around with tp looks bad. Agan already made the point that as most of the people who have discussed it have thought a wolf would never do that is a reason to consider it a succesful move by an intelligent wolf as a possible option.

One thing I would like to add here is that we do have a seer around here and the wolves wish to avoid her/his gaze. So doing something spectacularly innocentish-looking would be a decent tactics on that as the seer needs to consider whom s/he wishes to dream each Night. That kind of spectacle might be worth trying as the seer could well think:
"well Legate... hmm... but he wouldn't have done that were he a wolf, right, maybe I have more urgent reasons to check X this Night... I'll check him later when it's less pressing"
And we all know those less pressing times never come...

It seems I have the weightiest reasons to suspect Legate then? But I'm more than reluctant to try him out toDay for the case is more speculative than I'd wish it to be were I to vote someone who could be such an assistance to us.

Taking a short break and coming back with hopefully refreshed thoughts...

EDIT: X'd with a lot...

[McCaber]

Just checking in to see what's happened so far in our little government.

Not a lot, apparently. Anything I would say right now has already been seen and commented on by the actual reps, so I hope they know what they're talking about. I mean, we elected them.

And even after this many WW games, I have almost no idea where people are getting so much Day 1 arguments from. Ah well. It gives me things to think about.

[THE Ka]

First of all, an apology for being late in the latter process of things. My internet and electricity in general went out before I arrived home from work and I've had to use a friend's computer so far, so I probably will be juggling my time a bit.

Originally Posted by Gwath

Casinos: the red man's revenge.

Indeed, brother, indeed. Probably the best place I've ever worked at, with casino dollars funding my future education too, It's lovely.

Okay with that aside, now to give a bit more opinion for Boro88.

I agree with your observations on Nogrod, and if he was a wolf, what he'd likely be inclined to do to have more involvement in his base. If you can't convince in all groups of innocents, it makes more sense after you've been elected to have your hidden wolves sent out to bring in the rabble lot of us. Like I said in an earlier post, even an innocent representative can have a few wolves in their fan base and not even know it. I don't doubt that there is at least one wolf as a rep, but I don't think they would direct their wolves to themselves only.

As for Legate's big turn around, I was a bit unnerved by his reaction in the beginning. I couldn't follow any of his reasoning near the end, until he was on a better footing with the rest of the more vocal voters, and it seemed rather smooth and collected. Though, I wouldn't immediately point my pitchfork and cry 'wolf!' over it, since it reminds me of typical Legate behavior. That's the only thing so far that I disagree a little with Boro88 over. Though, I'd definately watch for him in the future, at least in reaction to less than collected suspicion, where not everyone is rabbling over his behavior.
Immediately putting him up on the block and trying to lend a ledge to indecisive players to chirp in sounds like the beginnings of a wolfish bandwagon.

I don't have anything on Kath. Though, I'm more curious whether she was a safe vote, or seemed safe to others who either trust her for her wisdom or, are trying to suvive by echoing the thoughts of others. I don't distrust Kath, but more of those voting her way. I don't have much playing experience with her either, unfortunately. So far she seems rather innocent, while I need to look back over other's votes for her.

For once Agan, you haven't gotten my immediate suspicion (I think Lobelia and Radagast have come to terms through counciling... Or good tea). Usually I always keep a focused eye on her work, but with RL and such and then now I can't see much in the way of obvious or slight wolfy actions. I just don't have a definate judgement for her behavior.

Shasta seems, interesting at least (and comedic, this game needs it for sure...), but either through a lack of previous experience with their playing style or what else, I don't have a distinct suspicion on Shasta, though neither a definate feeling of innocence.

Though, I can agree with this:

Originally Posted by Shasta

Mostly that, at the time, everyone I wanted as a Rep already had two votes and everyone that had one vote was someone I didn't care to trust just yet. And I wanted to give my vote to someone who would use it responsibly, as you've shown you can do, in past games.

This appears reasonable in judgement to myself at least. I at first thought of voting for Ilya for the obvious difference such a possiblity could make amoung more experienced representatives, but I knew it wouldn't help myself much in forming an opinion or definate attachment to this games' conflicts in the end. Thus, I voted for B88, etc. From past experience I've always found that his sense in matters was grounded, even if I didn't agree with them.
In short, as far as voting is concerned, Shasta isn't alarming.

I need to read a bit more, but this is mostly what I have for now. I should have more outlined opinions come later, plus I need to give the computer back to my friend...

~ Ka