WW LXXXII: Return to Tol-in-Gaurhoth

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Originally Posted by Loslote

Like I said, it's early in Day 1, and I'm probably wrong anyway. Total gut feeling, and I was trying to describe why...I'm hardly saying you're without question evil, just that you're my top (and only, really) suspect. As for your response, it sounds like the Wolf!Shastas I've seen before - really aggressive. As for the suspicion, you included a with it, so I didn't really pay much attention to that.

Repeat: Not solid proof that you're evil. Not even close. Complete gut feeling - but I don't trust you.

Fair enough, but you don't get to call me 'nonconfrontational' in one breath and then 'aggressive' in the next. It doesn't work like that.

In any case, I'm least okay with Pitch at the moment and most okay with Nerwen (mostly for her views on the cobbler). I'm going to try and sleep now - although I don't hold out too much hope considering the dark dankness of this cell.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

Fair enough, but you don't get to call me 'nonconfrontational' in one breath and then 'aggressive' in the next. It doesn't work like that.

Aggressively nonconfrontational? You don't think so?

Actually, I meant to call your response post aggressive, and the posts before that nonconfrontational. Sort of careful, then switch to defensively aggressive, that sort of thing...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Now we are starting to talk, which is funny and at least starting to give some ideas of what people are like. My initial feeling is the best about wilwa, because all she says is reasonable and at the same time a thing I believe Wolves would not just say randomly, like, not the sort of "fake wisdom" Wolves often use to seem reasonable.

The last exchange between Shasta and Lottie made me curious a bit, I wouldn't have thought Shasta strange by himself, but the way Lottie pointed it out seems rather weird - but Shasta's reaction likewise. His reaction was a bit, well, aggressive? To such a minor thing (or so it would seem). But the funniest part was Lottie's backing away after that. And the sort of repetitive "I think you are suspicious, BUT in fact I do not", which immediately made me think of Wolf-on-Wolf accusations, which are just a theatre for us... Not to say that Shasta's initial suspicion of Pitch could well be a simple random accusation made by a Wolf in order to have some good person to vote for toDay...

Well it's too early for any good suspicions, but this just raised my attention. As with everything, noting this down and looking forward to see how the Day continues, especially from the two...

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

Also, I entirely agree with Nerwen on the subject of the cobbler, and disagree with Legate - in no instance should the cobbler be 'ignored' (except of course in the case of a revealed cobbler, in which case we should 'ignore' everything they say should we not choose to lynch them immediately).

I knew there will be a discussion about this, simply because people have different opinions on this. Even considering what Nerwen said, I believe the Cobbler is not a threat. It can be so on some late Day, when there are few people left and he/she can vote with the Wolves to get rid of the villagers... Although okay, we are quite a small village here... hmm, I would have to count. Okay, I submit, maybe you are right and particularly in this village we should not ignore them for too long, but still, in the first Days it should not be our concern. And anyway, even in the later ones - I mean, we should look for WWs, not for Cobbler - once there are no WWs, the Cobbler has lost as well. So, still, I prefer to leave the Cobbler mostly because they tend to get themselves lynched pretty soon, usually, by themselves, because they just make a mess and thus, you can spot them. In any case, if you see somebody behaves suspiciously, you won't be able to say whether it's a Cobbler or not - or not necessarily (and it can be a Wolf faking to be a Cobbler etc.), so basically you vote for the person whoever it is, and learn their role once they hang, gibbets and crows, dotard, oh no, too bad, I guess we don't have any gibbets here in this dungeon and I think this wasn't my line anyway...

Originally Posted by Boromir88

How can you all jibber-jabber so much so quickly. Everyone's posting such long long paragraphs. *sigh*

The only thing I read after my post (since I just scanned the page for bolded Boro's)



I can think of more!

Guess I should read all the text that isn't bolded Boro's, eh.

Just to make you read this post And you hypocrite, don't pretend to make short posts just now, just wait when you get into some argument...

Gotta go now, will be around again...

EDIT: x-posted with Lottie

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

The last exchange between Shasta and Lottie made me curious a bit, I wouldn't have thought Shasta strange by himself, but the way Lottie pointed it out seems rather weird - but Shasta's reaction likewise. His reaction was a bit, well, aggressive? To such a minor thing (or so it would seem). But the funniest part was Lottie's backing away after that. And the sort of repetitive "I think you are suspicious, BUT in fact I do not", which immediately made me think of Wolf-on-Wolf accusations, which are just a theatre for us...

I do suspect him. He's my only suspicion so far. But it's Day 1, and I have a rather extensive history of being very, very wrong and not letting go of that suspicion. So I've started trying not to 'witch-hunt' early on...

Anyway, I really have to go to sleep now. I'll be back...before DL...for a bit...

[Glirdan]

Originally Posted by Legate

The last exchange between Shasta and Lottie made me curious a bit, I wouldn't have thought Shasta strange by himself, but the way Lottie pointed it out seems rather weird - but Shasta's reaction likewise. His reaction was a bit, well, aggressive? To such a minor thing (or so it would seem). But the funniest part was Lottie's backing away after that. And the sort of repetitive "I think you are suspicious, BUT in fact I do not", which immediately made me think of Wolf-on-Wolf accusations, which are just a theatre for us... Not to say that Shasta's initial suspicion of Pitch could well be a simple random accusation made by a Wolf in order to have some good person to vote for toDay...

I had actually been thinking about that while trying to fall asleep (made difficult by this lovely cold I seem to have ) and was just coming on to voice that and noticed you beat me to it.

But I am glad that I am not the only one who's initial thought was Wolf-on-Wolf. Shasta's defensive aggressive response to Lottie aside, their whole conversation is giving off an almost banter kind of vibe, especially after Shasta's response.

Originally Posted by Lottie

I do suspect him. He's my only suspicion so far. But it's Day 1, and I have a rather extensive history of being very, very wrong and not letting go of that suspicion. So I've started trying not to 'witch-hunt' early on...

And yet I've seen you go two games in a row and peg the Wolves based of IC posts and go on and lynch them to help win the game for the village....I seem to remember being one of those lynchee's actually

EDIT: Going to attempt sleep again...if I can't, well, I may post again within the next three hours or so

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

So, still, I prefer to leave the Cobbler mostly because they tend to get themselves lynched pretty soon, usually, by themselves, because they just make a mess and thus, you can spot them. In any case, if you see somebody behaves suspiciously, you won't be able to say whether it's a Cobbler or not - or not necessarily (and it can be a Wolf faking to be a Cobbler etc.), so basically you vote for the person whoever it is, and learn their role once they hang, gibbets and crows, dotard, oh no, too bad, I guess we don't have any gibbets here in this dungeon and I think this wasn't my line anyway...

Oh we'll find a way. We Noldor are ingenious. And I'm agreed that we should concentrate on finding the wolves. Just as long as we don't end up giving anyone a free pass for being a (supposed) "known traitor", and therefore "harmless". The annals tell us this has often proved unwise.

Originally Posted by Glirdan

But I am glad that I am not the only one who's initial thought was Wolf-on-Wolf. Shasta's defensive aggressive response to Lottie aside, their whole conversation is giving off an almost banter kind of vibe, especially after Shasta's response.

I'll third that. Note that it's not even clear why he's her top suspect– at least, this is the closest she gives to an explanation:

Originally Posted by Lottie

Actually, I meant to call your response post aggressive, and the posts before that nonconfrontational. Sort of careful, then switch to defensively aggressive, that sort of thing...

Which I think sounds awfully calculating. And then, the way she backs right off from suspecting him... it looks contrived. I can think of explanations other than Wolf-on-wolf, though. Cobbler testing the waters, for example.

[A Little Green]

A quick comment on the Day so far before dashing off again. First - I find it amusing that people keep saying the wolves are our top priority, and yet the main topic of discussion is the cobbler. Like, the cobbler is distracting the village already, and it's actually possible they haven't been around yet at all! Though of course it's pretty boring and unfruitful to start the Day with everyone echoing "We need to kill the wolves!" But still, I wouldn't be surprised if our cobbler was in fact one of those keeping up the debate about how to deal with the cobbler.

Another thing: the exchange between Lottie and Shasta. Possible scenarios:
a) Lottiewolf relying on "gut-feeling" to justify easy suspicion on an innocent Shasta. I don't find this that likely, though it's definitely a possibility. Lottie's tone is quite genuine, and if she's a wolf I'd be more inclined to think Shasta is one too (= option d)).
b) Innocent Lottie getting her famous gut-feeling on a Shastawolf. Definitely possible.
c) Innocent Lottie getting her famous gut-feeling on an innocent Shasta. Definitely possible.
d) Lottiewolf and Shastawolf mess around with a neat Day 1 wolf-on-wolf show. Certainly wouldn't put it past the two of them.


EDIT: x-ed with Nerwen

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

Another thing: the exchange between Lottie and Shasta. Possible scenarios:
a) Lottiewolf relying on "gut-feeling" to justify easy suspicion on an innocent Shasta. I don't find this that likely, though it's definitely a possibility. Lottie's tone is quite genuine, and if she's a wolf I'd be more inclined to think Shasta is one too (= option d)).
b) Innocent Lottie getting her famous gut-feeling on a Shastawolf. Definitely possible.
c) Innocent Lottie getting her famous gut-feeling on an innocent Shasta. Definitely possible.
d) Lottiewolf and Shastawolf mess around with a neat Day 1 wolf-on-wolf show. Certainly wouldn't put it past the two of them.

I'd say any of the above is possible, plus what I suggested... except that I'm surprised you find her tone "quite genuine", because it sounds anything but to me (note that this doesn't rule out b) or c)– I mean, I suppose she could be scrabbling for reasons to justify her "gut-feeling").

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by wilwa

Still though, a revealed hunter is less likely to be night killed, and then what good are they? Just saying, strongly opposed.

A hunter-revelation would be problematic indeed, not as such as the hunter could serve as a known innocent which would help us a lot in the endgame, but I'm not so sure how we could deal with a "hunter counter-reveal"... That's actually a maddening scenario, especially if it happens late in the game. And a card the cobbler would just love to play (one more reason to get rid of her/him if possible).

So how about we just made a deal that the hunter doesn't reveal? That way we could then lynch the possible imposter. *looks at the hunter and puts a finger on his lips... shhh...*

It seems the only interesting thing toDay has been this Lottie - Shasta to and fro, so it's understandable they have gathered the most suspicion. But I'd be careful at least yet to make any further conclusions about it. I mean especially Lottie tends to gather a lot of suspicion more or less every game in the beginning (I should know that as I tend to be one of those suspecting her), so I would almost say that I find those more suspicious who second or third the suspicions as "easy target" suspicions. But sure it's early to say at this point.

Okay. This is a bad Day for me as I need to be off to choir rehersals, but I'll be back for the last two hours. I hope we have a bit more lively discussion going on when I return (although not so many pages I don't have time to read all... ).

[Pitchwife]

Awake and catching up...

Originally Posted by Shasta

In other news, I'm finding something slightly off about Pitch. He's only made one post thus far, but as I read it there were points at which I felt he was being awfully... well, the pun is inevitable... agreeable.

Let's see these points, please.

Originally Posted by Nog

Right on spot Pitch. I paused at that while reading but got carried away by the cobbler-speculation... (but it did feed to my paranoia at the first read) The wolves will try to be nice and friendly. The innocents will be brutal and openly attacking people (hopefully). The wolves would love "friendliness-based lottery" of votes, while we innocents need to find out who the honey-tongued villains are.

Although I'm not too sure that quote merits as a reason to suspect Legate as you could read it as an IC comment as well.

Now what exactly are you doing here - just lecturing on general WW principles and saying they don't apply to the Legate-quote 'cause it's IC, or using my flippant remark to cast a shadow of doubt on Legate that doesn't quite amount to suspicion but could be exploited later? We wonders, my preciouss...
Oh, and wolves just lurve to hide their wolvery behind IC comments!

Originally Posted by Nerwen

You seem to assume that the traitor, not to mention those of us whose souls have been taken by the accursed Lord of Wolves, would reveal only as the Seer. Why should that be?

Well, Legate used the Seer as an example, so I concentrated on that; besides, as wilwa has observed, the Ranger has less reason to reveal unless in mortal danger, and the Hunter less than the Ranger, so to fake-reveal as the Seer seems the most likely.
That's not to say the other two are impossible or unheard of... and might in fact be more dangerous than the Seer-act, as they can't be disproven like a fake Seer can. Actually, my remark about the danger of a counter-reveal delayed too long was inspired by legends of a wolf-hunt before my time, where I think a wolf revealed as the Ranger, and the true Ranger didn't contest the claim until he was threatened with being lynched... and wasn't believed and was lynched. So yes, fake reveals do have their dangers.

Originally Posted by wilwa

I remember my only game as a cobbler I false revealed as the ranger and ended up accidently giving away who a wolf was and helping the village win. But I suppose that's a rare occurence...

Ah, the game with the two Seers and two Rangers... *revels in fond memories*

Originally Posted by Legate

In any case, if you see somebody behaves suspiciously, you won't be able to say whether it's a Cobbler or not - or not necessarily (and it can be a Wolf faking to be a Cobbler etc.), so basically you vote for the person whoever it is, and learn their role once they hang

Amen to that - we can't tell wolf from cobbler until they're dead, and that's the long and short of the whole discussion on whether we should concentrate on the cobbler (no we shouldn't) or ignore them (no we shouldn't).

On the Shasta-Lottie thing: Basically, Lottie's saying "I do suspect him in earnest, but I could be wrong" - and of course she could, such is the lot of an ordo, therefore it's trivial and she might as well not have bothered to say it. Peppering her suspicion with disclaimers like that does have a smell of wolvish caution, and it doesn't help that I don't see anything remotely worrying in that quote of Shasta she started her suspicion from.

Btw, I love Greenie's comment on the matter, presenting four scenarios and evaluating their respective probability as a) "definitely a possibility", b) "definitely possible", c) "definitely possible" and d) "certainly not past them". Makes everything so much clearer!

(x-ed with everything after #41)

[Boromir88]

Current thoughts on people who've caught my attention before I go grab some lunch and then back to vote.

I won't vote for Ozban or Pitch today. I like Oz's first post, curious to see more how she plays. I like Pitch's response to me about fake revealing, looks pretty innocent.

Don't really trust or distrust Legate but he's chattery enough to give us tons of information so eventually to his benefit or not, I'll figure him out.

So far everyone else could get my vote for either failing to make any strong impressions or being eerily spunky for some reason *looks at Nog*

And I'm not exactly understanding what you're seeing in Greenie's post to prop her up on this pedestal. I mean for pointing out here's 4 scenarios with the Lottie-Shasta business, could be any one of them?

[Eönwë]

Ok, well I'm here now.

I'll try to quickly read through the thread and see if anything jumps out at me...