T-I-G LXVII: The Rangers of the North - The Fell Winter

[Gwathagor]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

Okay, so you are asking, what is my perspective on Roa's points against me?

I have more or less been replying to it in the particular cases, so I really cannot sum it up. But more or less what was recurring was that she said I was "keeping repeating that Rune is innocent" (which I didn't, I said that "he could be innocent Rune" or something like that maybe once or twice, but mainly I just kept saying that I'm uncomfortable with lynching him, which is not the same, and the reasons for why I said that see below), "pushing myself for being a Captain" (not true, never said that), "having no real opinion" (or something of that sort, which I don't really understand) and that's probably it.

All in all, everything she brought against me can be described in one word: shallow. And I mean, really. It is no real case at all, and unless she voted me, I would not have even considered it anything "serious". I mean - if I was completely different player and been watching her saying this about another player, it would have seemed to me that she is just randomly babbling on the person's address. Neither of that is what I would call "a serious case". Like, I think she didn't even try to make any association of me with any Nightly kills, or try to provide my connection to some bandwagons or whatever. The thing which is closest to "proper" suspicion in her case would be my "support" for Rune (as she says it, whereas I have been discouraging people from voting Rune for Captain). Otherwise, like I said, I consider it rather "unserious" way of suspecting.

What I dislike of her accusations is her "dodging" - she never comments on my explanations (like that I was worried that Rune might be a Hunter and since he voted me, I was worried that he might target me and that is why I didn't dare to vote him) and seems to completely disregard them, pass them, let them be forgotten, and then she brings again the same case or makes a different one.

Well, hope that's enough for you.

It is. I read one of her major posts against you, and, to be honest, if she's representing what you said accurately, then I think that she's right in saying you're largely inconcrete, that many of your posts are long without saying much, and that you seem to inconsistently come down on both sides of an issue. However, I disagree with her in that I don't think it makes you look suspicious. If it was someone else, maybe, but I think that in your case it's just your playing style. You play WW like a philosopher: lots of words, lots of apparent contradictions, lots of questions - but not so many answers. As far as I'm concerned, you're ok for now.