WW LX - Mortal Men, doomed to die

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

This is the absolutely last time I try to go back and re-read all posts. . .I have just wasted several hours on reading and writting, the really silly think is that I have not even looked at Legate, Eomer and Nogrod yet! That will have to wait, I need to get some school work done today.

Anyways I will start with giving you some of my thoughts of peoples behaviour yesterday.


The Innocent!


Wilwarin538:
Day1: She cannot make it back later as she promised and she clearly has no idea who to vote for so she decides set up some criteria in order to figure out who to vote for. Then defends her choice to Eomer. I think she looks very innocent, she might not have contributed much and not posted much of substance, but the way she chose her lynch seems genuinely like a person who is clueless and in a hurry, I believe a wolf would have voted more in the way I did. Giving vague but valid reason and then maybe attach a comment about randomness or day 1 befuddlement

Lhunardawen:
Day1: Starts of with an introduction post, then she produces a really good post. It is relatively short, but gives a clear impression of her thoughts of certain people. She does not make it silly long with non-statements. Also when people come up very long cases on day 1, then you know they are over analyzing. She then votes. . . A generally innocent feel about her, but it is mostly based on post nr. 2.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

The Evil Ones:

Nerwen:
Day1:Has 3 in character posts, which seems to contain a few suspicions. . .I did not pick up on them because of the way it was written..
Day2: Argues that Kath was a no trace kill.

Nothing can be concluded from day1 alone, but the way she has started Day2 may indicate that she is a careful wolf.

Eönwë:
Day1: His day 1 mostly consists of a whole lot of comments, some alright and some completely irrelevant and then vote for Isabel. . .
Day2: Shows up, says hardly anything and then asks people what they think.

I think he looks bad, he posts quite a lot, but it is mostly comments to what others have said and he hardly puts anything forth him self. This is all topped off with a voted which is not based on suspicion.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Nothing can be concluded from day1 alone, but the way she has started Day2 may indicate that she is a careful wolf.

Uh... care to share that one with the class, Rune?

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Uh... care to share that one with the class, Rune?

You go into a debate about Kath was a no-trace kill and that is basicly all you had done. It is a very safe debate to get into, it is not the thing that will get you lynched, it might even make you look good.

There is nothing wrong with going into the debate, but when there is little else of substance then it make you look slightly evil to me.

I have not read your latest post yet, it might change my view. We are still early in the game so my view can still change relatively easy.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I seem to recall Wilwa about ready to vote for Lhuna - she said something about Lhuna creeping into her house in the dead of night to try to feast on her young, or something like that - so imagine my surprise when Wilwa did not in fact vote for Lhuna to be executed. Of course, I'll need to go back and check the wording but that's how I remember it. It's this kind of inconsistency which really gets me. I'm leaning towards thinking she's guilty but I'll confirm my opinion later.

Or does anyone see a problem with this?

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

I seem to recall Wilwa about ready to vote for Lhuna - she said something about Lhuna creeping into her house in the dead of night to try to feast on her young, or something like that - so imagine my surprise when Wilwa did not in fact vote for Lhuna to be executed. Of course, I'll need to go back and check the wording but that's how I remember it. It's this kind of inconsistency which really gets me. I'm leaning towards thinking she's guilty but I'll confirm my opinion later.

Or does anyone see a problem with this?

You seem to forget, dear, that one cannot always vote for the player they find the most suspicious. Well, they can, but there's not always much point in it. For instance, if I found Lhuna and Nienna suspicious, and Lhuna slightly more so, but Nienna and Nilp were the people with the most votes and I thought Nilp was innocent, I'd be silly to vote for Lhuna (I believe we normally call it a throwaway) when I could use my vote to actually make a difference.


I'm currently trying to decide if Eomer's guilty or just has had too much rum.



EDIT: x'd with Nerwen

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

What has that to do with me or Wilwa, Sally?

Anyway, I'm a whisky man. No time for rum. That's for sailors and Disney-Pirate-Wannabes.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Well, people have become quite less industrious of late. Ah, well . . . since it is a good way of gathering one's thoughts--besides, a rereading of the thread can yield new information--I shall post a vote list here.

DAY 1 (times are in GMT +8, known innocents are underlined).

16:08 Brinn - Sally
Sally - 1

Process of elimination + randomness. Possible Wraith-on-Wraith.

17:14 Shasta - Nogrod
Sally - 1, Nogrod - 1

A rather hurried vote, perhaps one made due to ill feelings, and the fact that the recipient has been (and still is) a more eager participant in these proceedings, and therefore an easy target for slander, among other things. Combined with other factors (i.e. the NIGHT kill) I am inclined to think him innocent. (Will be wary of him, however, due to historical things.)

20:11 Nilp - Nilp
Sally - 1, Nogrod - 1, Nilp - 1

I must admit I missed doing that. I also missed doing that and living to tell the tale ( at Sally).

20:42 Rune - Izzy
Sally - 1, Nogrod - 1, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 1

He has gone for the under-the-radar types who have posted, and then voted for the one he thought was most sneaky. Took flak for his '98% random' addendum, which seemed to me an innocuous remark. Looks helpful today, so perhaps innocent.

20:52 Wilwa - Eomer
Sally - 1, Nogrod - 1, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 1, Eomer - 1

Process of elimination + coin flip (i.e. randomness). Possible Wraith-on-Wraith; in fact, I think it is. Combined with his, ah, interesting interaction with Eomer, I am suspicious of her.

23:44 Sally - Nogrod
Sally - 1, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 1, Eomer - 1

'Darker motives', indeed. An excellent turn of phrase, and an excellent dodge of explanations, too. A tie-breaker vote and a possible bandwaggon starter, a vote highly suspected by many, myself included. (Sorry, luv, but I do have my duties. )

02:12 Lhuna - Legate
Sally - 1, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 1, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1

Has gone after him consistently in previous posts, and I could see her points against him--more on that later. Probably innocent.

03:18 Kent - Rune
Sally - 1, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 1, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

Latches on to the '98% random' comment. Combined with curious conversations with the aforementioned sorcerer I am suspicious of him.

03:24 Nienna - Sally
Sally - 2, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 1, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

Goes after Sally for her vote. Curiously, he defends Nogrod despite his vociferous statements regarding her kind (I myself, perhaps, am in that group). Probably innocent, but will bear close watching.

03:52 Legate - Izzy
Sally - 2, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 2, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

Has been going after Izzy in previous posts. (You and I, sir, will have to cross swords after all this is over. ) Vote looks innocent, but other aspects of his posting are not. I'll speak on that more later.

03:59 Izzy - Sally
Sally - 3, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 2, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

First of the cross-votes. A vote to save herself and Nogrod.

03:59 Kath - Izzy
Sally - 3, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 3, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

Second of the cross-votes. Went after Izzy for her controversial tie-keeping comment.

03: 59 Eomer - Izzy
Sally - 3, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 4, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

Third of the cross-votes. He intended to save Nogrod, and he has been declaring suspicion of Izzy in previous posts--which, interestingly, started after Rune's vote. Hmmm. Combined with certain posts and a few curious interactions with Legate I am suspicious of him--more on that later.

04:00 Eönwë - Izzy
Sally - 3, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 5, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

Fourth of the cross-votes. Chose by elimination, as he didn't want Nogrod dead and wary of lynching Sally. Hmmm. Will bear close watching.

04:01 Nogrod - Sally (did not count)
Sally - 3, Nogrod - 2, Nilp - 1, Izzy - 5, Eomer - 1, Legate - 1, Rune - 1

Has been going after Sally for her vote. Probably innocent, or a cool customer. Inclined to think the former.

No votes: Groin, Nerwen, Nogrod (late vote).

More on certain detail later.

[Kent2010]

Uh... care to share that one with the class, Rune?
-Nerwen

I can explain how I felt about your response to Kath's death, because I have nearly the same feeling as Rune.

Eomer apparently set some kind of trap about the reason Kath was killed and the people who have since come out and insisted Kath was a no-trail kill. I am in limbo about Eomer, because logically it makes sense, it is something I tried on Day 1 in my first game about the new feature of "bonus votes." So, Eomer's feelings about people claiming why Kath was obviously killed are logical, but I am in unsure about him, because anyone with confidence worries me. Eomer seems to be confident this caught a wraith, but there is a fallacy, and that is Eomer is assuming our wraiths are talking and are willing to respond. It might have worked, if we have gabby, type-happy wraiths. But it will fail miserably if we have silent, cautious wraiths.

I don't know about why wolves would kill who they do, I would imagine their first target would always be the seer, and someone's use of words may tip them off. But if so many people believe Kath was a no-trail kill then there has to be some kind of precedent in WW where the wolves target no-trail people? Eomer may have set some kind of trap, but he could have easily trapped innocents who are willingly participating and trying to figure out all the evidence, not wraiths laying low. Is that making sense?

Anyway, the reason I am wary of your response, is the way you are currently playing. Laying low, being in-character most of Day 1, and I admit my vision of baddies has been skewed from my first game. Your response is non-commital you seemingly support Eomer's statement about people assuring why Kath was killed, but then ponder the no-trace kill. You are playing the mediator to Eomer's aggressive confidence. Plus your response comes after Eomer's reveal that "the wraiths easily fell to his trap!," which makes me suspicious towards both of you.

Edit: I cross-posted with many

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Kent2010

Your response is non-commital you seemingly support Eomer's statement about people assuring why Kath was killed, but then ponder the no-trace kill. You are playing the mediator to Eomer's aggressive confidence.

Kent, I was just trying to work out why the wolves would have chosen a no-trace kill (if indeed they did) rather than try for a gifted... motivations can be a clue to identity, you know.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

You go into a debate about Kath was a no-trace kill and that is basicly all you had done. It is a very safe debate to get into, it is not the thing that will get you lynched, it might even make you look good.

??? I was speculating on the implications of the kill, not arguing on whether it was no-trace or not.

EDIT: X'd with Eomer.

[Nogrod]

It's funny how communities of people create common truths they all recite like parrots. My "aggressiviness" seems to be one of those saying out aloud of which is always accepted and creates nice bridges of understanding between people. It's nice to be such an indirect "community organiser" indeed. Quite nice visions for career-developement.

But really. I don't think I have ever done this but now I feel I have to at last.

I am not an aggressive, angry and humourless gaffer who plays with taste of blood in his mouth. Sorry. Wrong image.

I'll give you a few hints into reading my posting.

1) High content on self-irony and sarcasm involved, always.
2) Strict separation of what I think about the people playing with me and what I say in-game of them, always.
3) I like to try people, push them to react (how else do you unbalance a careful wolfie?) - that's not aggression, it's testing (I do it always as an innocent and pretend to do it when a baddie) and trying to force others to play.
4) It's hard to express this one (language barriers) but hopefully you get it: I'm always serious about the game (in a sense of doing my best, giving a full effort time allowing) but never serious (in a sense of being grave or without humour).
5) Exception to the rules above, especially rule 4: on morning hours (+3GMT) when innocent / gifted cornered by baddies and facing lynching and having taken too many glasses of wine... I know that's bad.

But that's just a guideline for reading. Feel free to suspect, vote and lynch me if you see it reasonable or tactically good. I just hate to be looked at as a grumpy old man - which this post kind of makes me on a second thought...

Okay. Some actual commments concerning toDay's issues to follow soonish.

EDIT: X'd with a host of posts it seems...

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

It's funny how communities of people create common truths they all recite like parrots. My "aggressiviness" seems to be one of those saying out aloud of which is always accepted and creates nice bridges of understanding between people. It's nice to be such an indirect "community organiser" indeed. Quite nice visions for career-developement.

But really. I don't think I have ever done this but now I feel I have to at last.

I am not an aggressive, angry and humourless gaffer who plays with taste of blood in his mouth. Sorry. Wrong image.

I'll give you a few hints into reading my posting.

1) High content on self-irony and sarcasm involved, always.
2) Strict separation of what I think about the people playing with me and what I say in-game of them, always.
3) I like to try people, push them to react (how else do you unbalance a careful wolfie?) - that's not aggression, it's testing (I do it always as an innocent and pretend to do it when a baddie) and trying to force others to play.
4) It's hard to express this one (language barriers) but hopefully you get it: I'm always serious about the game (in a sense of doing my best, giving a full effort time allowing) but never serious (in a sense of being grave or without humour).
5) Exception to the rules above, especially rule 4: on morning hours (+3GMT) when innocent / gifted cornered by baddies and facing lynching and having taken too many glasses of wine... I know that's bad.

But that's just a guideline for reading. Feel free to suspect, vote and lynch me if you see it reasonable or tactically good. I just hate to be looked at as a grumpy old man - which this post kind of makes me on a second thought...

Okay. Some actual commments concerning toDay's issues to follow soonish.

EDIT: X'd with a host of posts it seems...

*hugs*

I didn't think you were harsh is in grumpy, dear one. I meant harsh in the game sense. You're still everyone's favorite yellow galoshes wearing guy.


EDIT: x'd with Eomer and Kent. I'd take you up on the Spam-a-Thon, but I haven't the time to come up with the material. Make it up in your head; I'm sure it'll be enjoyable as always. Maybe next game.

[wilwarin538]

Originally Posted by Eönwë

One and a half posts = obsessed?

The "haha" was cause I was joking about that part . I didn't mean to make it sound like that was the reason I was unsure of you.

Just popped in quick between checking my e-mails, heading out now and am now pretty much positive that I won't be able to make it back.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Could Go Either Way:

Kent2010:
Day1: Starts of with 2 random posts before getting to the business. He then gets started by reacting to Nogrod’s comments and then attacks me for my “attack” on Nogrod. He seems to have gotten the impression that I wanted Nogrod lynched, which was not at all the case. His response to Wilwa puzzles me, it seems like one of those “good” things to say, which is painfully obvious and only seem to be said in order to look good. In his last 2 posts of the day he talks about being confused, feeling good about Legate and Eomer and then he votes for me. I seem to be the focus of his suspicions, in fact I seem to be the only one he really speaks against. It might be because he misunderstood my debate with Nogrod. (btw it is not the first time me and Nogrod end up in this discussion). He generally seems OK, but his response to Wilwa worries me. . .Maybe, just maybe he is the kind of wolf who deliberately misunderstand people and build cases on it.


Day2: He starts of with declaring that he thinks me innocent, something I obviously enjoy reading, but there where other reasons for me to like his first 2 posts of the day. He seems to look at things in a different way, one could say “with fresh eyes”. I really like how he questions everything from your actions, to certain phrases that you use. He also points out that Nogrod demands a lot of people and talks a lot, but when deadline comes it is seldom that he himself deliver. On the negative side there is his respons to Wilwa “Not to call you a hypocrit”. . .if you don’t want to call people hypocrites then don’t use the word. (It is very simple) It seems like a very odd thing to say.



I like the way he has played today, but of course a wolf could play just the same. Day 2 leaves the same impression as Day1, generally I like him, but there are some things that makes me wonder.


Brinniel:
Day1: I don’t like her first comment of the game, it seems like it is written so that people shall pity her, but then again it is very like her to portray her self as a victim. (I could be reading it wrong) She then explains that she will not be around much, which is fair enough. Makes a random vote and that is about it. . . She seems like her self, but she is one of those people that is very hard to figure out.



Nienna:
]Day1: Not much to go on, only have 2 posts of substance. . . In the first she defends her self against the bile of Nogrod. She then votes Sally because she thinks her vote for Nogrod looks like an attempt to start a bandwagon. It is impossible to determine anything from that. . .she participates, but without putting anything of substance forth, a typical day1 situation.
Day2: Starts day 2 much in the same manner as she started day1, is still freaked out by Sally, promises to be back before deadline.

I will leave it to later before deciding if she I consider her a lynch candidate.


Satansaloser2005:
Day1: She starts more directly than others with a post with her thoughts, which is a mix of serious and silly comments. She then replies to some comments and expand on her worries about Nogrod before voting for him. I don’t think one can expect much more from a day one. I am a bit worried though, because Sally strikes me as different than how I remember her. . .this might mean she has a different role than before.