Werewolf XXXI: The Unknown Enemies

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Roa

One more thing gives me pause though, and while Nogrod was right in suggesting we not use the information learned from last night's events, I can't help but think that a wolvish Nogrod would never let a kill get away.

Originally Posted by Roa

And I'm going shamelessly metagame (use outside knowledge) and vote
++Gil
Because he's the most likely to let a kill slip away.
I know you didn't want us to use that, Nogrod, and that's honorable and admirable, but I can't help having that thought in my head. It seems silly to ignore the common sense of the matter.

Okay. So be it. And now that you mentioned these again I guess the milk is spilled wide enough anyhow. And looking at the brighter side of this: if Menel has some nasty surprises for us in this game maybe it's just fair we can also use some unfair means of getting our wolves... (I remember Lommy once got my ancestor who was a wolf by mod-Glirdy slipping the sex of the wolf in the narration... so this would not be the first time)

So you're absolutely right with the first one. I was there before and after the deadline and would never let a kill slip. If I were a wolf and my mate wouldn't be around near the deadline I'd take action by myself, not bothering to wait for my lazy / unfortunate mate (I'd send a kill to the mod on my own and added that it's subject to change if my mate miraculously reappears from somewhere before the DL, or something like that).

And what you say about Gil is just what I have been thinking myself. That's why I picked him back to my "needs to analyse" list as I wished to be able to read him through and find something else to suspect him for than this "probably the one to be able to miss a kill" -argument...

In fact I'm going to try and do just that now. And take a look at few others as well as I think I need to do some rearranging in my mind about certain people - mainly dropping them from my suspicions if the rereading allows that.

[Mithalwen]

Blimey, clearly I should have read the admin thread at lunchtime!!!!

Rather annoying to be described as stalling when one has made a huge effort to participate even for 20 minutes 4-5 hours earlier than wouldhave been otherwise possible......


Idle wolves ..... does anyone really think for a second that I would have missed a kill? I was online yesterday til nearly the deadline thought I am not sure I posted enough to prove it.

[Macalaure]

Lommy's posts yesterDay have been talked of enough, so here's what she said today. She has very limited time, let's see how she spent it.


First

She comments about people being snappy and edgy, when at the same time we are doing fine. I already said how suspicious I find this.

Her comment about the non-kill is classically lommyish, but does not really further our cause.


Second

She says a cunning and bold wolf might have voted like Six did. Doesn't this imply that a cunning and bold wolf would have voted the way Lommy herself voted, too? Yet she said the things I said about her made her raise an eyebrow (without explanation why). If I'm oversimplifying things, then at least I'm not aware of this.

What has happened to Gil??? I quite like his new self, and would not like voting him right now without strong judgement.

I don't know what this is supposed to mean. Did I miss something? Gil is more outspoken than he used to be (praise Eru!), why is she putting talk about voting him in there?

She's suspicious of tgwbs and will look at him closer.

There's also some good advice for Six and some joking. All nice, but isn't time pressing us?


Third

Brinniel - innocent: agreement here
Gil - again, says she likes his way, but immediately talks about lynching him again, even though she says she doesn't want to. I'm sorry, but this leaves a sneaky impression with me.
Legate - funny, yes, but I have no idea how she got there.
Me - hasty and edgy? I don't know about hasty, but I'm sure I've been more edgy in some past games.
Mith - puts her in the middle zone, but somehow this one feels really sneaky
Nogrod - she made up her mind about Roa's analysis and apparently decided to dismiss it.
Rikae - nothing
Roa - she decided not to like Roa's analysis, that's ok. She still believes Roa to be innocent, that's ok, too.
tgwbs - bad case against her, deliberately misunderstanding Roa, Roa makes good points against him: this is all not inherently suspicious, but, lacking a better word right now, hasty.
Six - innocentish, but unsure: this is interpretable in both ways
Xyzzy - nothing, of course

Her conclusion: tgwbs or me, maybe Mith or Legate


Fourth

She votes tgwbs for his bad case against her. Just because it's not unexpected now, it doesn't mean it's not retaliation.

He seems very edgy/jumpy too.

Yes, he does! But that does not necessarily point towards wolvishness. More often, in fact, it points towards the opposite.



Well, Lommy's posts today do not cry wolf, but also aren't model-innocentish by far. I did not encounter one thing that made me feel more easy about her than before. If she is evil, then her behaviour fits seamlessly. If I had a better suspect today, I would go with that one, but I don't. Unless something strange happens, I will vote Lommy today.

This makes three votes for Lommy now. I'm really interested in seeing what rivaling bandwaggon will appear against Lommy's.


PS: I suggest that those who spill the milk shall have to drink it.

edit: crossed with Brinn

[Mithalwen]

We don't know if we have a ranger though, so if we go a night with out a kill, we cannot assume that a person was protected. Roa

So no kill means that the wolves just decided not to kill anybody? Why not come to the sensible conclusion that no kill = ranger? Why is she trying to make us doubt even this? TGWBS

Maybe we have very cunning wolves rather than idle ones... but Brinniel, that isn't a confession.....

Is it coincidence, TGWBS trying to frame Roa, or Roa bluffing....? I need to go through everything... but if anyone else is inclined ot give their opinion I woul dbe interested.

[Brinniel]

As of now, the official voting count looks like this:

tgwbs: 2
Mithalwen: 1
Gil-Galad: 1
Lommy: 1

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong...

Five votes down, seven to go...

I have to run to class right now, but I will be back around an hour before deadline, which should give me enough time to vote.

[Nogrod]

Okay. Here's what I have for Gil-Galad

D1
#5 Two line nonsense.

#31 Suspects Lommy for “defending” Roa. Speculates whether they could be our gifteds. Ends up suspecting them both. A weird post I must say.

#38 Votes for Lommy

#62 Comes back to state his point that if Lommy is a wolf then Roa and The Sixth might be as well and if she is innocent then the two would be innocent as well.

D2
#120 His longest post in ww-history as he said it. And it’s just so weird... First he lists the votes from D1 and says that those who voted for Glirdy tend to be innocent (which is not true or at least anything obvious). He notes that Brinn and Mith voted somewhat strangely.

Then comes this I don’t know what to say about:

another thing that bugs me today, is Macalaures post, is it a conicendence that your inncoent list contains Mith and Sixth, which if i do math again, included your self will equal the remaining wolves? (i'm uncertain right now of how many wolves we have in the vilalge, is it three or four?) if it is indeed only 3 wolves then i will proabaly let this accusation slide.

It is followed by reasoning about Glirdy trying to cover for his mate The Sixth by voting him. But it was that early so would that have been necessary or wise? I don’t think so.

Then his list:

suspicious ~ Lommy, sixth
somewhat suspicious ~ Mithalwen, Macalaure
unsure ~ Tgwbs, Legate,
somewhat innocent ~ Roa, Rikae, Nogrod, Xyzzy

Post ends with a suggestion to vote for The Sixth...

#122 Answers Roa by a counter-attack. Doesn’t think people should be “compassionate” towards newbies. Suggests that if Roa defends The Sixth she might be a wolf defending her mate.

#150 Votes for Mith because Mith tried to cover for Glirdy with her vote on Day1. Which I find an interesting interpretation. Wonders about Lommy defending Roa and then Roa defending Lommy. Thinks tgwbs innocent.

#156 Defends himself against Roa again, quite concernedly. Thinks Lommy and Roa have a tag-team against him, feels cornered by everyone (accuses Roa and Lommy about it).


So what to say of this? I think most of his stated reasons to suspect this or that player are quite bad. But it's hard to read him in the first place. He really manages to puzzle me.

I had some preliminary ideas about him and Lommy being two wolves but I think I need to drop that idea. His insistence on suspecting (and voting) Lommy is not something I'd expect from a lupine Gil - from some others I might expect it though.

The only thing that raises my eyebrows with some real concern is his unexpected activity in this game. It's a good thing, no doubt about that. It just makes me wonder a bit.

I'm less convinced of his lupinity at the moment but would not free him from suspicion either.

Something on Lommy in a minute...

EDIT: X'd with many...

[Nogrod]

I happily noted that Mac had done Lommy for toDay so I can spare myself from writing everything down.

So here's what I have on Lommy D1.

#15 Cool post, defending Roa and Rikae slightly and suspecting Glirdy with reservations. Especially this caught my attention:

Glirdan then... he's the one to turn heads this morning... and for a reason. His jump to support Rikae's feeble-ish accusations so early is like an example from the classic Spot-a-Wolf -book. He seems suspicious to me, yet I wonder if a wolf'd be this... obvious.

Could be read as a wolf-on-wolf suspicion but could be read off quite innocentishly as well.

#17 Makes the case against Glirdy more open:

Yes, Glirdan seems quite taking Rikae's point - which was not an accusation in my opinion - and turning it to an accusation while trying to make it seem that Rikae's with him there... Looks quite bad...

#18 Votes Glirdan with the following explanation:

He looks quite bad. (Though possibly he looks too bad to be a real baddie.)
I must say that the evidence against him is in a way quite feeble (at this phase of the day) - I would love to hear Glirdy explaining his actions or responding to the accusations against him in some way, for one, and it's never wise to judge on the basis of only a few posts - but I'm going to vote him because he simply seems clearly the most suspicious of those who have posted this far.

Her reservations over her vote are perfectly reasonable as there was little to base one’s decision at that time and as an innocent one would be a bit worried about one’s vote. But then again it is easy to see that as a wolf she couldn’t switch from the road she had taken and vote for someone else anymore at that time – and she was in a hurry, innocent or not.


Summa summarum. It's pretty easy to construct two interpretations on Lommy here. In the one she's the reasonable and caring villager who tries to remember every time the best of the village, is careful (to the point of waffling? ) and calm. In the other she's the cunning wolf who exploits her RL-hindrances to the fullest and wears the mask of a reasonable person with little time on her hands. I wouldn't be surprised by either one. She could pull out the tricksery stuff but she could as well be innocent.

I need to find better candidates...

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

We don't know if we have a ranger though, so if we go a night with out a kill, we cannot assume that a person was protected. Roa

So no kill means that the wolves just decided not to kill anybody? Why not come to the sensible conclusion that no kill = ranger? Why is she trying to make us doubt even this? TGWBS

It just occurred to me that we might have a Cursed Villager among us, a villager who, when attacked by the wolves, turns into one of them. This would result in a night without a kill, too.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Macalaure

It just occurred to me that we might have a Cursed Villager among us, a villager who, when attacked by the wolves, turns into one of them. This would result in a night without a kill, too.

But why would then Menel speak about delaying the deadline because of the wolves not sending him the kill?

[Mithalwen]

I doubt he would have actually stated that he had decided not to kill anyone in those circumstances. But that doesn't mean that there isn't a cursed of course....

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

But why would then Menel speak about delaying the deadline because of the wolves not sending him the kill?

Oh, no, no! You misunderstand me. Or I wasn't clear enough...

I was referring to Mith, who was referring to Roa's and tgwbs's general point about being able to count with a ranger if there's no kill in one night. If there is nothing special, as there was tonight, Roa is right here, because of the possible existance of a Cursed.

[Brinniel]

Nogrod, you wrote earlier:

I have a suggestion. I hope you agree with it.

So how about we just make a deal that no one discusses the events of the last Night and uses none of the information s/he might have gained, direct or indirect, as evidence or reason to back up any of her/his views in-game?

The other possibility surely is that we exploit all there is, but I think that would not be wise if we wish to maintain something like a fair play here.

Surely everyone is allowed to make her/his deductions of things that have happened outside the game-thread - I have done a lot myself already. But let us try to not use them as arguments in-game and try to find other ways to make our points about suspicions and feeling easier about people?

Okay, Roa has decided to exploit this issue...her vote is not exactly something I agree with, but I'm not going worry about it for the moment.

The thing is, Nogrod seemed so against making arguments and decisions based on what happened last Night. Now that Roa has brought it up, he seems a little too eager to jump on Gil for the same reasons. This makes me a bit uneasy.

So, perhaps we could go on analyzing who the wolf may be based on last Night's events, but I don't think that'll get us anywhere. Alright, maybe some could be more likely to let a kill go than others, but honestly, would any wolf really want that to happen, especially after a Day One lynching of their mate? I think the most likely explanation for what happened is that something came up in RL for at least one of the wolves that was unavoidable and there was a misunderstanding between the two on who was submitting the kill. I'm not sure...but it's not something we will know until the game is over. But I think lynching someone only based on this is very weak.

I still don't understand this bandwagon against Lommy. Perhaps I am being blindly misled, but for now I have to agree with Sixth and say her posts seem fairly honest and trustful to me. I don't know...all this mistrust towards her is rather confusing to me. If she is still alive tomorrow, I suppose I'll start examining her more closely...maybe there is something I'm just not seeing.

On tgwbs, I really have no idea whether he is innocent or not...certainly there are plenty who seem to think the latter. While I don't agree with his suspicions on Lommy and Roa, he doesn't really give off a wolfish vibe for me. As of the moment, I feel rather hesitant to vote for tgwbs.

Okay, this is how I'm seeing things right now:

Most Likely Innocent:
Sixth Wizard

Possibly Innocent:
Lommy
Macalaure
Legate

Unsure:
Roa
tgwbs
xyzzy
Rikae

Slightly Suspicious:
Gil-Galad

Suspicious:
Mithalwen
Nogrod