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

[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!

[Diamond18]

I've been meaning to ask a question, but keep forgetting: Nogrod, what's with the Roman Numerals beside people's names in the vote counts you give? To what do they pertain? I can't figure it out.

[Roa_Aoife]

I've been meaning to ask a question, but keep forgetting: Nogrod, what's with the Roman Numerals beside people's names in the vote counts you give? To what do they pertain? I can't figure it out.

I believe that's the order the votes came in. As in

Suspect 3 - (Voter I {First vote of the day} Voter IV {Fourth vote of the Day} Voter VII {Seventh vote of the Day}

And with that, I have to check out for the night (It's past 1am here.) Hope to see more out there when I get back.

[Grendelien]

First off, I'd like to congratulate the Ranger on a job well done! This is very good news for our village!
[Just as a prewarning, a piece of something or other is stuck under my spacebar, so I apologize in advance if some joined words happen to pass by my superb (ahem) editing skills]

Secondly, I must censure myself for my poor voting grounds. I was intially suspicious of Celuien, and I did question Caranlondien's innocence, but these are terrible reasons to vote for a different (and innocent) person. I should have voted based on my own suspicion of the person, not because I thought those who voted for another were suspicious.

Though I was suspicious (I need to find a synonym for this word) early on, at this point, I can find little evidence, other than my normal paranoia, that Caranlondien is a wereorc. Her posts seem reasonable (gah, more paranoia rising to the surface) and unhasty. If we later discover that Spawn is innocent, this may be some ilk of indication that she is a wereorc...but at this point, everyone is making claims, so I cannot find evidence to prove her guilty.

I am still not convinced that Diamond is innocent, for she seems quick to attack.

My worries about Celuien and Nogrod arose because, despite how Diamond phrased it,...

Originally Posted by Diamond18

Nogrod posts the most of any player, and this is usual for him. He's the first to make suggestions and form theories about how to use the Shaman role.

...I was afraid this normal behavior may be a cover-up. My nature automatically wants to believe the words of leader-like people, so I was rebelling against my instinct, in a sense, by trying to make myself realize that wolves, too, can act normally as a cover-up. This is no reason to believe right off that Nogrod or Celuien are definitely wolves, or are definitely innocent. I just mean to point out that people who post a lot and act normally (or suspiciously), and people who post very little and act suspiciously (or normally) have equal likelihoods of being wolves.

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

As it is weekend, I don't have much time to be online, and I'd rather use that time analysing other villagers than defending myself, but since so many of you is now finding me slightly suspicious, I think it's fair to say something about my behaviour yesterday.

Well, Nogrod, I saw that you might be making grounds for a case against me in your post #118 when you started twisting my words.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Spawn #35: Suspecting Diamond for chatting to avoid “under radar” suspicions. Roa about excusing random voting and taking time to answer Jenny’s joke accusation. Findëasëa, for posting only once – then retreating with first-timer issue. Sleepy, for not being serious although saying he is.

In my post #34, I said that we have to start the analyses from something, so I listed things that "had caught my attention". I did not suspect Findëasëa for posting only once. I pointed out that she hadn't posted her own personal views at all. Also, I didn't suspect Sleepy for "not being serious although saying he is". Sleepy did not say that he is serious, he said that Wereorc hunting is serious business. I mentioned that he didn't seem to be taking it very seriously.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Spawn #45 Just votes boldly for Roa, with no further reason given...

Heh, those three dots just give away your attitude towards me. Trying to start a Spawn bandwagon, eh? I said that I needed to vote immediately, so I didn't have time to analyse anything new. Since Roa seemed the most suspicious to me, I voted for her.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

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)

If that's not a case, I don't know what is. I'm sorry if this looks like a knee jerk reaction, but I can't help wondering if you are an orc trying to make flawed accusatons against me hoping that other villagers will buy them, and once I'm found innocent, you can excuse yourself and say that you didn't actually even make a case against me.

I stand behind what I've said earlier. It was my mistake to believe that we would find out if someone had got a dream or not, but that's all. If it looks like "orc-propaganda", then you probably have to vote for me, but I will not defend myself anymore toDay (unless other villagers demand me to answer something).

Hmph, great. I have to go now, but I'll be back later with thoughts about other villagers.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by dancing spawn of ungoliant

It was my mistake to believe that we would find out if someone had got a dream or not, but that's all.

I am quite ready and willing to tone down my suspicion on this part, as I have seen some other villagers thinking the same way. So that might be a misunderstanding, and thence understandable.

But that Roa-case I still wonder, as I can see nothing suspicious in her posts you got yourself attacking against. It honestly looked like trying to make mountain out of a molehill anyways. Maybe that is "the first day" etc., but I'm not sure, whether we should excuse everything by just saying, it's the first day -stuff.

But as one of Spawn's suspicions concerned the random-voting case, I would like to just make a distinction here. For I think there are basically two kinds of "random-voting".

Firstly, you may find yourself in a situation, where you have to vote, and you have nothing to go on with: no theories, no arguments, no reasoned suspicions etc. Then you may vote by hunch: just thinking who feels the worst, or whom your intuition tells you gives out the foulest impression. That's something you may be forced to do, and I myself accept it as a last resort.

Secondly, you may come up with a kind of "technically random" vote. Like using a random generator, or telling you are voting for the seventh people on the list of villagers (or two names under your own) etc. That I think as nasty way of playing. As it is easter-time, I could say, that that is like washing your hands from your vote of guilt... That way you are not answerable of your vote. And that's something suiting the wolves (orcs) just fine - and remember, that person may fool us by stating her/his randomness. That's even more wolvish.

When you give reasons for your votes, or suspicions, they can be publicly tested and valued, but all random-stuff stays outside the discussion forum - and therefore is highly suspicios.

EDIT: PS. My suspicions of Spawn are a prime example of what I meant with this public assessment: as I stated the reasons why I suspected her, she and others could have their say with shared arguments. And because of these comments, I have already declared coming down with part of my suspicions - as we have found a source for that misunderstanding together. This is the way, I think, we should play. Only three orcs around: we others are at the same side!

[Diamond18]

Originally Posted by Grendelien

Secondly, I must censure myself for my poor voting grounds. I was intially suspicious of Celuien, and I did question Caranlondien's innocence, but these are terrible reasons to vote for a different (and innocent) person. I should have voted based on my own suspicion of the person, not because I thought those who voted for another were suspicious.

Actually, if I may... what's the matter with being suspicious of other people's voting? Voting more than anything reveals people's true agendas.

Who a player does or does not vote for and their reasons for it can be very telling.

I am still not convinced that Diamond is innocent, for she seems quick to attack.

Exactly what do you mean by this? I attacked no one at all (seriously) the first day. My vote for Glirdan was purely a defensive act (better he die than me). How was I quick to attack? I've mostly been responding to accusations so far.

Now, in asking you why you said this I'm not saying it means you're an Orc. I realize I am generally suspicious, since various people have called me suspicious for: posting nonsense, posting analysis, being too defenseive, and being too offensive. Everyone who has accused me can't be an Orc. But I would like some more explanation from you as to this claim.

[Roa_Aoife]

Originally Posted by Grendelien

Secondly, I must censure myself for my poor voting grounds. I was intially suspicious of Celuien, and I did question Caranlondien's innocence, but these are terrible reasons to vote for a different (and innocent) person.

Hey, sorry, I've had a rather busy past few days, so my brain is easily confused. I don't think I understand what this sentence means. You were suspicious of Celuien and Caran, so you voted for Glirdan? I don't get it....

Originally Posted by Diamond

I realize I am generally suspicious, since various people have called me suspicious for: posting nonsense, posting analysis, being too defenseive, and being too offensive. Everyone who has accused me can't be an Orc.

I'm actually with you on this one Diamond. After going back and looking, it seems everyone is trying to find fault with you somehow.

Naria, when I do an analysis, I generally post the summary seperate from my thoughts on it, simply to provide an easy access summary for everyone with out immediately biasing everyone. (I didn't before because it was just going to be a long string of analysis. and I didn't want to get everything muddled up.) I think it's perfectly reasonable that she saved the analysis for later.

Though, speaking about later analysis, Nogrod, what are your thoughts on that whole suspicion thing you posted?

[Legolas in spandex]

If it wasn't obvious, my vote was in my last post. I think the name was Diamond .

[Nogrod]

Just popping in shortly. Will be back nearer the end of the day: bad day for gaming...

But I'm afraid we are quite in the dark still about any good suspects. The more confusion, the better it is for the orcs.

As I don't see any real "orcish" things around, I will have to look at something different. What came to my mind, was seeing if there was anything that was in some way odd, or ununderstandable. I guess we have at least two such incidents.

Spawn's attack on Roa I have already talked. Maybe I just add the following: the orcs know, who the innocents are. Now a player like Roa would be very good asset to our village, were she innocent. So the orcs might want to get her out of the way by lynching also. But on the other hand, it would be quite daring tactics from the orc to go so bluntly against someone with zero-grounds (well, almost zero), as it will arouse suspicion. Added to this: she went to great lengths suspecting Roa for mildly favouring random voting, but hardly mentioned Sleepy's bold announcement to vote randomly? So: Spawn's posting confuses me.

Another case is Celuien's declaration of my innocence. I myself know, that it is true, but still I wonder why she did it. If I have gathered it right, she seems to be an experienced and thoughtful player, so she surely isn't the shaman announcing her dream of me: she would not have acted so clumsily (the only suspicion on me, ungrounded as one could be, was Jenny's joke - at least I took it as a joke, as we have a history of mutual distrust in games before this one). But could she be a shaman impersonator? What would she gain with that? Or siding with an innocent so as to make that innocent (me) trust her? Or just announcing her trust on my innocence (why?)? Celuien's post confuses me.

I hope there will be more discussion while I'm gone. I'll just throw another idea to be considered. As we are reaching the end of day2 with no good suspicions (those above are not "well grounded suspicions", just something I can't quite make out myself) to vote along with, then we should think about other tactics. Spreading the vote again would be frustrating, but a possible way to go.

But in that case, should we start picking on those, who really post minimally or not at all? I'm afraid of losing useful and well playing villagers in a situation, where we don't really have a good cause over anyone... There would the advantage in this plan, that were there orcs using the "under radar"-tactics, they could be forced out into the open by this kind of a threat?

And anyway: non-posters will be all the more dangerous and annoying, the longer we play...

EDIT: X-posted with a couple of last messages...

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I think there are basically two kinds of "random-voting".

Firstly, you may find yourself in a situation, where you have to vote, and you have nothing to go on with: no theories, no arguments, no reasoned suspicions etc. Then you may vote by hunch: just thinking who feels the worst, or whom your intuition tells you gives out the foulest impression. That's something you may be forced to do, and I myself accept it as a last resort.

Ah, but then it's not random anymore. Voting based on a gut feeling isn't random because there is something that made you feel uneasy about someone.

EDIT: PS. My suspicions of Spawn are a prime example of what I meant with this public assessment: as I stated the reasons why I suspected her, she and others could have their say with shared arguments. And because of these comments, I have already declared coming down with part of my suspicions - as we have found a source for that misunderstanding together. This is the way, I think, we should play. Only three orcs around: we others are at the same side!

That's nice, but generally if one is innocent I don't think they should rely too much on other people's opinions because they can't know whether they are orcs or not.


Now, I'll take a moment to say a few words about some of the quieter inhabitants of this village.

- Azaelia. First post: Says that those who get a dream shouldn't leave too obvious clues for other villagers although they should somehow indicate that they had a dream. I would have expected a bit more from her as her first post, but she said that she had to go elsewhere, so I understand that she probably didn't have time to start analysing other villagers then.

Second post: Ah, now she's being herself. Goes through the villagers and states her opinion of them. It's interesting, though, that she chose to pick only me alongside of herself as a probable innocent although there were other people, too, that she didn't seem to find very guilty (like Nogrod).

Third post: Wants to give Diamond the benefit of doubt and says that Glirdan and Sleepy look equally suspicious. Votes for Glirdan because of his random vote. Fourth post: Defends her earlier actions. Says that as an orc she wouldn't have named her fellow orc as a second innocent with herself which means that Spawn isn't an orc (interesting logics there ).

Something in Azaelia doesn't feel quite normal although her posts are generally well reasoned and everything. I'll keep an eye on her.

- Findëasëa. First post: Didn't express her own thoughts at all, and said very little about anything. Second post: Votes for Glirdan because "his posts had very little substance. He was also quick to choose a random vote and explain away his lack of posts". I don't think Findëasëa can afford to vote someone because of insufficiently substantial posts. I need to hear more from her before making any conclusions.

- Grendelien. First post: Didn't say much. She commented the dreaming issue, though, and her conclusion was that "we should act how we see best fit, given the situation". A somewhat typical first post.

Second post: Agrees that Diamond may look bad, but says that those who seem to be helpful might actually be orcs (mentiones Nogrod and Celuien). Votes for Glirdan because she's suspicious of "some of those who voted for Diamond", and it's the only reason she has at that point.

Third post: Regrets her vote and explains her behaviour. Isn't convinced about Diamond's innocence. Says that she was suspicious of Celuien and Caranlondien, but now she can't find things that would incriminate Caran. Says that if Spawn is innocent, Caran might be an orc, though. I'd like to know where she got that idea. Just curious. I can't decide if Grendelien makes more peculiar or good posts. Worth watching, like everyone in this village actually, but maybe even more so.

- Naria. First post: Day 1 chatting, comments on the dream issue and says that those who get a dream should reveal their dream only when they think the time is right. Second post, explains her first post and says that we should drop talking about the dreams and concentrate on catching the orcs.

Third post: Apologises for not voting, says that she hasn't found anyone suspicious yet. Fourth post: Points out that Diamond's words contradict with her actions about analysing the events in the village. Hmm, I've never seen Naria this helpful. Is this a good or bad sign? In any case, keep it up.

- Kitanna. First post: Comments the dreaming issue. Second post: Gives a little summary about the day thus far with her comments in it. Third post: Goes through everyone who has received votes giving her thoughts about them. Votes for Sleepy because "the plea for life (for lack of a better phrase) on Day one, before any suspicions had been cast on him is too much for me. It would appear to be foolish for a wereorc, but nothing ever seems to be too foolish in these games". Kitanna's behaviour is helpful and she seems reasonable to me at this point.

- Legolas. The most confused novice I've seen. It's hard to tell anything about her.


Edit: Cross-posted quite a bit...

[Diamond18]

Originally Posted by Diamond18

Actually, if I may... what's the matter with being suspicious of other people's voting? Voting more than anything reveals people's true agendas.

Who a player does or does not vote for and their reasons for it can be very telling.

Grend, I apologize, I've just realized that I misunderstood what you were saying. You regretted voting for Glirdan based on being suspicious of other people for their votes against me, rather than regretting that you were suspicious of those voters. Ah. Right. I get it now.

Well, at any rate I appreciate any vote that helps save my life.

[Grendelien]

Originally Posted by Diamond18

Exactly what do you mean by this? I attacked no one at all (seriously) the first day. My vote for Glirdan was purely a defensive act (better he die than me). How was I quick to attack? I've mostly been responding to accusations so far.

By "quick to attack," I meant that you seemed overly offensive (and defensive), as a defensive strategy. However, I can understand your need to protect yourself, as no villager or orc wants to be lynched. Orcs generally have a greater reason to be defensive, since they are smaller in number, but it would probably be unwise for an orc to be openly defensive so often. I do have a tendency to second-guess myself, which means that I think frequent defensive posting could be a diversion (gah, back to that again)...but since I cannot come to any conclusion about this yet, I won't use Diamond's self-protective posts as a reason to find her guilty thus far.