WW LXXXII: Return to Tol-in-Gaurhoth

[Loslote]

Nerwen's explanation makes a lot of sense, and Greenie hadn't been untalked about - more than one person commented on her post. Coupled with her late bandwagon-vote, she doesn't exactly make my list of people I'm not voting for - which, in case anyone was wondering (doubtful ) consists primarily of:

Glirdy and Zil as not-evil;
Boro and Nerwen (as intelligent).

Not-trusted:
Pitchie because of uncertainty as to whether Shasta dreamed him evil or not;
Nog because he makes me uneasy;
Legate because he seems just a bit too smooth (don't really suspect him for it, but don't trust him because of it, either);
Ozzy because I don't know him well enough to read him yet (and I can just see the wolves pulling off a brilliant double-bluff by making a newbie seem totally well adjusted);
Everyone Else because I haven't noticed anything about them.

SO yeah. Not going to vote for People I Am Not Voting For. Probably not Ozzy, Nog, Pitchie, or most of the people I haven't noticed. Which leaves Legate, Greenie, or a random sub-ish person. Preferably not random sub-ish person.

I'll be on again in the morning, but I don't know how much. It won't be sleep time for another hour or so, either, so I'll be around...some...toDay...

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Loslote

Nerwen's explanation makes a lot of sense, and Greenie hadn't been untalked about - more than one person commented on her post. Coupled with her late bandwagon-vote, she doesn't exactly make my list of people I'm not voting for - which, in case anyone was wondering (doubtful ) consists primarily of:

Glirdy and Zil as not-evil;
Boro and Nerwen (as intelligent).

Not-trusted:
Pitchie because of uncertainty as to whether Shasta dreamed him evil or not;
Nog because he makes me uneasy;
Legate because he seems just a bit too smooth (don't really suspect him for it, but don't trust him because of it, either);
Ozzy because I don't know him well enough to read him yet (and I can just see the wolves pulling off a brilliant double-bluff by making a newbie seem totally well adjusted);
Everyone Else because I haven't noticed anything about them.

SO yeah. Not going to vote for People I Am Not Voting For. Probably not Ozzy, Nog, Pitchie, or most of the people I haven't noticed. Which leaves Legate, Greenie, or a random sub-ish person. Preferably not random sub-ish person.

Hang on. Why Legate and Greenie over the others in you "not-trusted" list?

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Hang on. Why Legate and Greenie over the others in you "not-trusted" list?

Because the only reason not to trust Pitchie is that he might have been dreamed. Other than that, he looks fine to me. Ozzy is just a "what it" sort of suspicion - hardly a good reason for a vote. And Nog just makes me feel uneasy, which he usually does anyway, so I'm not reading all that much into it. And I do not want to randomly vote for someone I've got no read on on Day 2.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Loslote

Because the only reason not to trust Pitchie is that he might have been dreamed.

But calling that the only reason is not unlike saying that we are now being held captive by the only evil Maia on this island* It isn't exactly a mere trifle. You went after Shasta in the first place because of his strange vehemence against Pitchwife. Others noticed it too. It seems to have been Zil and Glirdan's main reason for voting him.

And now we know Shasta was the Seer...

EDIT:X'd with Legate.





*I don't care if the rest of you have given up on ic-posting. I'll do it if I want to. Nyahhh.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I actually have more time than I originally thought I would have and I am back already, so a few comments: I'm starting to feel quite well about Boro (especially his post 139, which seems both okay to me when it comes to its substance as well as it seeming genuinely innocent, which is the main point) and also Nerwen because of her posts and responses (sort of similar case). I am not still so sure about Lottie. For that matter, I would still like to know more about her picks - so is it just choosing the best possible pick for lynch since you don't actually have much of an idea about anybody, do I get it right?

For that matter, I will really have to vote soon (in, say, two hours at most), so I should just start slowly deciding... I have basically two main options right now, that being Glirdy and Lottie.

Otherwise: Boro, Nerwen, Pitch I feel quite good about at the moment, wilwa also although now she hasn't posted much and her last post was nothing special, but I probably won't be around to hear more from her; Ozban I am watching, but convinced to leave him be for the time being and just observe; skip I feel a bit better about from his early toDay posting, Nogrod has still some questionmarks but likewise he is not so heavily alarming now, Greenie and Eönwë I have very little idea about and Inzil too, with some more like gut-feeling of uneasiness with him, but that's mostly it.

I'm thinking that at least one Wolf might be among the two I am considering to vote right now, Glirdy looks a bit more likely to be a baddie to me, but we shall see. I'll check a few times if anybody posts anything, and then I will have to vote and go.

[Nerwen]

I keep thinking about the "who did Shasta dream?" question. I think it has to be either me (innocent) or Pitch (wolf).

In support of the theory that it was me we have the fact that the wolves and Ranger both picked the same person, suggesting that they were following the same line of reasoning. Now, the wolves, unlike the Ranger obviously wouldn't have seen me as a "dreamed innocent" if they knew that the Seer's dream had been one of them.

In support of the theory that it was Pitch, we have Shasta's otherwise inexplicable "case" on him. We also have, perhaps, the fact of the huge bandwagon. I'm still not sure who was driving the thing, but it surely had wolfish involvement– could the wolves have picked him as the Seer, and taken the opportunity to get rid of him?

Reading through yesterDay, I can't see any good reason for Shasta to act as he did unless he'd got a wolf– and yet Pitch nowhere sounds wolfish, except perhaps in his vote-post.

As for the Shasta-voters... actually they all look quite suspicious after another read-though. I'm not sure what to think yet.

EDIT:X'd with 2 Legates.

[Ozban]

After reading whole thread through again, I tend to suspect Lottie. Especially his toDay's posts sound crooked. Then again, I'd say that if Lottie'd be a wolf, she wouldn't cast a vote first. And even without any firm accusation, just a "gut-feeling"? Such an approach seem to risky for a wolf to try it.

I'm not really fond of Legate either, he's still seems somehow... someone described it as "too smooth". His toDay's post did fix his reputation partly, but I shall still observe him closer than the others.

Pitch never sounded wolfish, but that scenario of him being dreamt unnerves me. eventhough it seems to me more likely, that Nerwen was dreamt about. From Shasta's formulation of his trust towards her... Still can't now. (Actually I begin to think it's motto of this whole game: Do something when you know nothing. )

Those last two votes, Nog n Greenie, are quite suspicious. Reading through Nog's posts, he remains active, but refrains from attacking anybody. Now I'd really need comparison with some of his older games, whether it's totaly normal or not.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Let this not be forgotten toMorrow if Shasta is innocent!

This speaks for him though, doesn't it?

Serching for traces of some manipulation, as Nerwen suggested, I tend to think that it wasn't Nog's doing. I'm convinced though, that among Shasta-voters were at least one, more likely two wolves.

If there has been any silent intrigues, I'd say that Zil and Gilr were most active at accusing pauvre Seer. It may be genuine, of course, but in a way it seem too concentrated on Shasta, leaving Lottie out, why? Cover?

Also...

Originally Posted by skip spence

You know, I'm fine with ...

++Shasta

What the hell???
I don't know. Seems too carefree, too crowd-loving if you know what I mean.

And...

Originally Posted by A Little Green

Not that it makes any difference now..

++ Shasta

Because of what I've said before, don't have the time or energy to repeat everything.

Same.

In the end Eönwë was only one of us that defended Shasta. For that he has my trust. As much as is possible in this game.

Truth is, sadly I know none of you, in-game at least. So it's hard to guess peoples intentions, without comparision with their previous styles.

Later...

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I keep think about the "who did Shasta dream?" question. I think it has to be either me (innocent) or Pitch (wolf).

In support of the theory that it was me we have the fact that the wolves and Ranger both picked the same person, suggesting that they were following the same line of reasoning. Now, the wolves, unlike the Ranger obviously wouldn't have seen me as a "dreamed innocent" if they knew that the Seer's dream had been one of them.

Hmm, usually the early kills are either set for who the wolves think the Seer is, or to be trailless. We know the former option wasn't on their mind last night.

The ranger's mind was on the same page as the wolves last night, but I don't think the seer dream would have been much of a consideration. Like you said, if one of the wolves thought they were dreamed, then they wouldn't be considering killing a "dreamed innocent." But even if they didn't think one of them was Shasta's dream, with how trailless and little Shasta's posts were, they couldn't find any obvious clues that would lead us to the "dreamed innocent" to be all that concerned about killing the "dreamed innocent." That's a bit jumpled, but in summary, I think now you're over-complicating it.

In support of the theory that it was Pitch, we have Shasta's otherwise inexplicable "case" on him. We also have, perhaps, the fact of the huge bandwagon. I'm still not sure who was driving the thing, but it surely had wolfish involvement– could the wolves have picked him as the Seer, and taken the opportunity to get rid of him?

Reading through yesterDay, I can't see any good reason for Shasta to act as he did unless he'd got a wolf– and yet Pitch nowhere sounds wolfish, except perhaps in his vote-post.

I agree that band-wagon had wolvery written all over it. With regards to Pitch, the only thing that looks more worse for him is his first response to Lottie (about Shasta) was...

Originally Posted by Pitch, #48

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.

He would later adjust his tune to suspecting Shasta more and eventually voting for him. Of course people change and waffle back and forth, but it may be worthy to point out. He first seems to regard the Lottie-Shasta trifle as a trivial row between 2 innocents, but changes to suspecting Shasta.

I'm beating on the same drum about that band-wagon (and I'm skeptical of Nogrod suggesting it was justified because Shasta was so obviously suspicious), but Nerwen's absolutely right that's got wolf prints all over it. I think Legate, or Nerwen, or someone had mentioned this early but worth saying again. When you have that type of attention and battle between two people usually there is a much mroe even split and division, and there was none, which suggests wolves pushed a bandwagon onto Shasta.

Now this doesn't mean they were protecting a bandwagon against a wolf-Lottie, maybe they saw an opportunity to implicate both by getting a bandwagon against Shasta, but at the same time framing an innocent-Lottie to make it look like they were protecting her.

I can't tell who drove it either, but I do know this. Greenie gives her 4 possibilities and seems to take the side that Lottie looks more innocent than Shasta. Nerwen interprets it differently and seems to think of the two Shasta looks more innocent (correct?) So there's the split, and you've got Shasta of course saying Greenie's reasons for defending Lottie were junk.

Greenie and/or Nerwen could be wolves here to put more focus on the two, however for now I think they were both commenting on the first spark of action in the day that wasn't cobbler talk. What's more suspicious is everything after the split of opinion, everyone piles onto Shasta.

The talk evolves into a "wolf on wolf" between Lottie and Shasta, and in those situations it really should be 50-50, with how people interpret things differently, but instead it was all a thumbs up for Greenie's post and Shasta looks more suspicious. Which, is also suspicious, I mean what was so spectacular about Greenie's post (no offense Greenie)? What it essentially was is...here's 4 possibilities between Lottie and Shasta, any one of them is equally possible? I also recall a lot of Shasta is getting very aggressive and defensive (so latching onto Lottie's self-admitted "gut feelings") to pile against Shasta.

That whole situation after Greenie and Nerwen's differing opinions (and it's important to add Legate's vote for Lottie because he felt of the two Lottie was more suspicious) is wolvish. You should see a continued even-split in votes and what we get is consistent several pats on the back for Greenie's post, and a move to "Lottie and Shasta look wolf-on-wolf...Shasta looks like the wolf more than Lottie!)

One thing away from the band-wagon yesterday, to say to is about Wilwa's self-vote. It may be the frustration of having a meaningless vote, but it looks pretty weird and flippant. More like a cobbler signal to the wolves though than a wolf casting a meaningless vote. She said she never had the chance to vote for herself, seems to have wanted to and now was as good of a chance as any, but also find yourself a good opportunity to say "Here's your cobbler wolvsies," Wilwa?

Pre-edit: because I've got distracted by an outside convo and this post has taken longer than anticipated, so I'm sure I've crossed. Nerwen's post that I reply to here is the last one I read.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I don't have so much time now, replying to some posts, but not to all... will look at the rest when I come back...

Originally Posted by Glirdan

I hate to be the one to blatantly point out the obvious, but all Day 1 lynches are completely random unless a Seer were to stupidly reveal themselves on Day 1 for one Wolf. And what do you mean, "the worst thing about the Seer-lynch"? You mean there WAS something good in lynching our Seer on Day 1? Because if there is I would very much like to hear what. I see no upside to having lynched our Seer yesterDay. Yes I know I was one of those advocating for it, but that is because I actually had suspicions of him on Day 1.

There is of course nothing good at lynching the Seer, but the worst (which is worse than "bad", in case you were wondering) is that it cannot even give us much material to analyse. There would have been something sort-of positive if we could at least get clues from it. But this is pointless, as I have already concluded that there already is something to find there. See above...

I see you're point at the end. Yet he could simply be a mere innocent who did not want to join the mob. May I ask why you are more suspicious of him then say, Wilwa, who not only did the exact same thing as he, but even more so as she was the last to vote?

It is the way it is phrased and the way they use it. The main point is not just the vote itself, but also how the people explain it. Wilwa's explanation seemed innocent, whereas Ozzy seemed more likely fake to me, see above the posts toDay where I am discussing with him.

Well that's funny because I just went back through your posts and nowhere do you mention having any form of opinion on myself and I think you only mentioned Skip once and that was asking to hear more of him in post #45

It is possible I didn't mention you, but I was curious about you. Late in the Day, as you know, I didn't have time and so didn't post anything long where I could list my opinions on everybody.

Here's a thought. Maybe it was Nerwen who the Ranger protected? The Wolves would be smart and go through the game thread and examine every last post and think of the possible meanings, especially after having Shasta revealed as the Seer. They already know that Nerwen is innocent, so why not tie up any loose threads and be done with her so that we couldn't have a known innocent? Maybe the Ranger also picked up on it and that's who he/she chose to protect?

That's not a bad idea, of course given if Nerwen is innocent. I am not 100% sure neither of Boro's strong suggestion that it is evil Pitch who was the dream (okay, but now I see he clarified it and said it was meant differently), nor Glirdy's who seems to suggest rather strongly that it was innocent Nerwen... but we'll see. I'll think of it when I come back.

There is something unnerving me about Lottie's recent post, if I say it shortly, sort of hypocrisy or what... it looks like that... ("oh you lynched shasta"). I know an innocent can start a bandwaggon unwillingly, but still this looks fake.

Whatever... gotta really run now! Will be back in several hours.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, time to vote is getting near for me. Actually upon reading her posts, I am now inclined to vote Lottie toDay. Seriously, especially her toDay's posts are just... bad. (And that said, the suspicion for the strange way she behaved in relation to Shasta yesterDay still holds, of course, too.)

Originally Posted by Loslote

First off - what the hey? What was that? That bandwagon has got to be one of the silliest bandwagons I've seen in a long time (and the fact that I've seen sillier is just sad. ). And by 'that bandwagon', I mostly mean the...five, was it, people who voted close to each other, towards the end. Did you guys see no problems in this situation?

This is one of the things. I know and can understand, like I have said already, that an innocent can start a bandwaggon which ends up with lynching the Seer, and she does not even know what she does will turn into a bandwaggon (of course she does not!). She can also still scorn the people for lynching the Seer. Of course, she has the right to, it is a harm to everyone in the village. But this way Lottie does it is incredible hypocrisy, I say. "Did you guys see no problem in the bandwaggon I have started?" I mean, I am really curious what would you say had you been around yesterDay at that time. Only if you said "wait, now I am beginning to doubt whether I voted well", I would be able to let you pass with the above. But generally if you vote for somebody, you want them lynched, right? But this way... no word about one's own role in the stuff, although I don't expect you to come crying and begging us for forgiveness, still this is like totally forgetting that you were the one who started it all.

Yeah, I realized later that my disclaimers could look Seerish. After I noticed that, my 'plan' was to lynch Shasta, who was supposed to be a wolf, and then maybe/hopefully the wolves would kill me instead of the real Seer. Yeah. That went well. Now pardon me while I go head-desk for a few minutes...

I just don't believe it. That looks fake. There's been, btw, already about half a dozen people claiming they voted as they did because they thought somebody was the Seer or something... but this one looks just the least credible of all. It looks fabricated. (And just as a sort of addendum, these rolleyes-smileys all over the place also don't add to the credibility.)

Originally Posted by Loslote

I'd just like to say that, if Pitchie is a dream'd wolf, a packmate would press the Nerwen-dream. But in general Glirdy's tone in this game has been very non-wolfish, and I'm inclined to trust him...or at least, not vote him.

This is one typical thing the Wolves just do: "btw, you people might also want to start suspecting this one, because he did XY, you know. But actually I am not suspecting him. I am just saying, so that you know." Don't like it either.

Originally Posted by Loslote

Nerwen's explanation makes a lot of sense, and Greenie hadn't been untalked about - more than one person commented on her post. Coupled with her late bandwagon-vote, she doesn't exactly make my list of people I'm not voting for - which, in case anyone was wondering (doubtful) consists primarily of:

Glirdy and Zil as not-evil;
Boro and Nerwen (as intelligent).

Not-trusted:
Pitchie because of uncertainty as to whether Shasta dreamed him evil or not;
Nog because he makes me uneasy;
Legate because he seems just a bit too smooth (don't really suspect him for it, but don't trust him because of it, either);
Ozzy because I don't know him well enough to read him yet (and I can just see the wolves pulling off a brilliant double-bluff by making a newbie seem totally well adjusted);
Everyone Else because I haven't noticed anything about them.

SO yeah. Not going to vote for People I Am Not Voting For. Probably not Ozzy, Nog, Pitchie, or most of the people I haven't noticed. Which leaves Legate, Greenie, or a random sub-ish person. Preferably not random sub-ish person.

And then this last one with the list of people... agreeing with Nerwen and sort of emphasising "pardoning" her (cf. what's been said about agreeable Wolves here, and Wolves can be really nice and pardon people, especially since they know who is innocent and who probably really didn't mean anything wrong by what they did, etc.)...

And where did this Greenie suspicion come from anyway? I don't see her even in Lottie's list. Isn't it per any chance picking on what Nerwen just said about suspecting her, or a slip of mind where she noted to herself - as a Wolf - "Nerwen seemed to suspect Greenie, from now on I am pretending to trust her because of that explanation" and accidentally then messing it up in her head and writing her among the suspects? I can see that happening to a Wolf...

All in all, my vote probably goes there... just going to look if perchance anybody didn't post meanwhile and then I go...

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Okay, for epic triple-post...

++Lottie

Vote well, village, and hopefully see you on the following Day... (and in the best case, with a dead Wolf there.)

[wilwarin538]

Originally Posted by Boro

That Day 1 would make a good psych study though, because usually once you get one dissenter those after the dissenter are more likely to dissent themselves. However, no one dissented, and without a dissenter the rocks just keep piling. Morrrre weight!

Hmm, perhaps this is what I should do my honours thesis on? But yes, it was a super strange bandwaggon. Look at this:

Lottie -> Shasta
Shasta -> Pitch
Legate -> Lottie
Inzil -> Shasta 2
Glirdy -> Shasta 3
Skip - > Shasta 4
Pitch - > Shasta 5
Boro - > Nerwen
Greenie - > Shasta 6
Nog - > Shasta 7
Ozzy - > Legate
Wilwa - > Wilwa

Looking at just the placement of the votes I'd say Skip, Pitch, Greenie and Nog have the worst ones. (though I would need to look at their actual reasoning before I could say whether it was actually suspicious) And has anyone realised that nobody else yesterday had more than one vote. Shasta was not that suspicious, at least not so much more so than Lottie. So I don't understand. I'm going to go back and take a closer look at all this.

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

This is one of the things. I know and can understand, like I have said already, that an innocent can start a bandwaggon which ends up with lynching the Seer, and she does not even know what she does will turn into a bandwaggon (of course she does not!). She can also still scorn the people for lynching the Seer. Of course, she has the right to, it is a harm to everyone in the village. But this way Lottie does it is incredible hypocrisy, I say. "Did you guys see no problem in the bandwaggon I have started?" I mean, I am really curious what would you say had you been around yesterDay at that time. Only if you said "wait, now I am beginning to doubt whether I voted well", I would be able to let you pass with the above. But generally if you vote for somebody, you want them lynched, right? But this way... no word about one's own role in the stuff, although I don't expect you to come crying and begging us for forgiveness, still this is like totally forgetting that you were the one who started it all.

I agree with Legate's point. Like she's saying "what were you guys thinking when you agreed with me about his suspiciousness?". Seriously? Anyone who actually voted for him is not allowed to say "what were you guys thinking". You vote for someone, you obviously want them dead, you can't chastise other people who also voted for them. Admittedly the later voters do look worse, but putting all the blame on them is silliness.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

It's been said already– he could have dreamed me as an innocent. However, let us suppose Shasta did in fact dream Pitch– perhaps he was trying to provoke Mr Agreeable Wolf into a response? Or trying to leave a trail back to him in case he died? A bit clumsy, yes, but it was my jewel's first time as a Seer.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

And that's what makes me the most wary. I mean would a seer Shasta who dreamt of a Pitchwolf continually just pile on weak, unreasoned suspicions like that on Day 1? Quite bold and reckless indeed and heck if I'd know that.

Ok, I know that it looks too obvious to be Pitch, but are we seriously going to gamble with this? There's a chance that he was Shasta's dream, that should be enough to lynch him. We know Shasta obviously had a dream, and I would think he'd leave some sort of clue somewhere.

See one thing that goes through a wolf's head when they are choosing who to kill is to look for Seer hints that point to them. If we hadn't of killed Shasta and Pitchwolf was indeed his dream just think of what may have happened last Night. Pitchwolf and his mates looking for possible Seers, see Shasta's blatant attack on him, and maybe think "wow, he could be the Seer, but if we kill him and we're right than that will point straight to Pitch" or "he could be the Seer, but Shasta would never be that obvious, he's bluffing". I actually think it would be a smart thing to be overly obvious about a dream like that, it may have protected him from the wolves. Savvy?

And I have to say, knowing Shasta, that if Pitchwolf was his dream and we decide to ignore the hints, Shasta will mass murder us out of frustration.

x'ed with Nerwen, and just had a thought, Nerwen would be a likely Night 1 dream for Shasta, but I still think we shouldn't let Pitch get by