Tol-in-Gaurhoth LII: Star Crossed II: Together for Eternity

[Aganzir]

Okay I read quickly through the thread in order to see if anything should catch my eye.

I think Mac and Rikae are weird.

Originally Posted by Rikae

1) He pops in early on day 1 bursting with overconfidence that he knows exactly how this game will go down - ie, just like the last.

I agree about this.

However, Rikae's certainty that Mac has a role because she hasn't is strange. The point that Di wouldn't make them both ordos is just bad. There's a certain likelihood that two good players get a special role, but there are many others than Mac and Rikae as well - and who knows if the roles were selected randomly? In any case, it definitely isn't a point I would use against somebody, and to me it seems Rikae should know better, too. I don't find it that surprising that Lommy thought her accusations of Mac were a joke.

Originally Posted by Macalaure

If you look back on my past wolf appearances, you will see that the bursting and overconfident wolves usually ended up as very early roadkill. Why should I play like that if I was evil?

Saying "As a wolf, I wouldn't do this" isn't really the best possible way to defend oneself.

Originally Posted by Mac

Last time she semi-randomized the roles, so it might actually be possible we're on the same side at last. Otherwise, since I know I'm innocent, you're evil, which would mean that I would have to try to get you lynched, which I rather wouldn't.

This quote just keeps bothering me... Really I know it's quite petty but that on the same side just feels wrong. I can't explain it (I tried to write my thoughts down but got so mixed up that decided to let it be).
I don't know - Mac just seems to find the idea that one of them has a role so normal, so casual... And to him role only means either an ordo or a baddie - no thoughts about possible giftedness. Like "if you don't (at least pretend to) believe I'm innocent I will have to lynch you, so better believe it!" Sorry, this is unclear. I just can't put it any better.

Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil

You can't just assume your audience knows what you're talking about: so before you get to the point, you make sure everybody's got a bit of foundational knowledge.

That's a totally different matter. You don't get a bit of foundational knowledge by speculating.
I still think Fea's reasons as to why we should talk about the possible roles are bad. The last one (about the chance of slipping) wasn't as bad as the earlier ones, but even it looked more like she had just come up with it suddenly after running out of other reasons. I doubt very much anyone would slip anything, and therefore all rule talk seems to me more like a futile thing to do.
I'm not saying you couldn't do it, I just don't see the sense in it.
I remember once asking a player if she encouraged speculating and trying to get into some conclusion because she was afraid of slipping something she shouldn't have known and therefore wanted some public agreement about how things most likely could be. It came to my mind now.

Originally Posted by Rikae

Bolding mine -
where did that come from? Kind of out of the blue...

The tone of this post is somewhat accusing, as if Rikae tried to indicate she had caught me slipping something. Dunno - too surprised-sounding to sound honest. Overreacting to a comment. (For the record, it was the sentence where I said we couldn't know if the baddies had both a team and lovers.)

Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil

Ergo, anybody denying the validity of creating hypothetical lists either doesn't understand the significance of seeking motive, or doesn't want to have to construct posts which look more innocent than they are.

You know, it sounds a bit like you were implying that speculating about rules instead of people is more significant when trying to pester out the baddies and their lovers, which is certainly not the case.

Originally Posted by Feanor of the Peredhil

If we force discussion about a specific topic, we force what will essentially be a series of lies from people who know more than everybody else about what's going on. The more lies a person is forced to tell, the easier it is to pick out inconsistencies, as well as it being easier to glean knowledge we probably wouldn't otherwise have.

You're really too keen on that rule discussion now.

Actually I think Fea could be a lover or something - the way she stubbornly sets out to defend the pros of rule discussion is odd, and especially taken to such lengths, it doesn't sound entirely honest.

Originally Posted by Macalaure

Lommy is too nice and seems to try to not make any enemies (apart from Aganzir).

I agree she's being somewhat too nice.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

I'm not trying to make enemies with her! Do you want proof? For I was just thinking that she looks more and more innocent as the Day proceeds.

What you refrained from saying when replying to Mac actually says: "I'm being too nice and try not to make any enemies, not even Agan!"
Lommy is really too tra-la-la-ley, happy and nice.

So now if I had to make a list of people who have posted enough to catch my attention in a negative way thus far, it'd consist of Mac, Rikae, Lommy and Fea.

edit: xed with Kit, Lom, Leg & Nog