WWLXX: At the Prison of Ice

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

So what do we say of Lottie? As I said yesterDay the wolves will not kill her so it's up to us to decide (sorry Sally, I saw you hinting at me giving the wolves info late yesterDay but really they would see it anyway - and if I was a wolf I would have rather told them that during the Night and not talk of it in open - which I thought I should do as I couldn't know whether I was alive toDay or not).

I don't like this, you are basically giving the wolves a reason to not kill Lottie. By saying "Let's give her a few days and if she's not dead then we'll lynch her" you're offering the wolves a lynch target in a couple days, so why kill her?

There are conspiracies and bold wolvery, but lynching Lottie in a few days, for the reason that she isn't dead yet, ergo she has to be a wolf is ridiculous.

1. She gave us a wolf
2. Her reveal and details check out
3. He reasons for revealing check out

We'd be foolish to follow that proposed plan. No what we do is we accept the fact that Lottie is a known innocent, who gave us a wolf. If the wolves want to keep her around, that's their perogative. Lottie, the wolves seemed to have determined even as a revealed innocent you're not a threat, make them regret it.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

or like you, Mac and Nogrod. I'm starting to think that you all (and me too) are still alive because one of us is a wolf.

That's kind of crappy news because I really don't suspect any of you. So either somebody's fooling me quite brilliantly (Nogrod?) or I am a wolf myself, no, not that but I had to leave it there because it was sort of the logical continuation of the sentence but definitely not what I'm thinking or I'm getting paranoid (which is not good news either) either because the wolves are intending people to get paranoid because of the "veteran loudmouths" all surviving or because it's just random we're all alive.

I don't like this either, there are an infinite number of reasons I'm (and other vocalists) are alive at this point, other than we must be wolves. That's poor reasons to suspect someone, because you make it sound like we're always the wolves primary kill choices when that's not true.

Maybe Brinn and/or Mac are wolves, and I'm alive because they have no reason to kill me since I haven't been suspecting them at all.

Maybe they're killing those who look even more innocent.

Maybe they haven't killed me, because I'm being a pain to the wrong people and I haven't done anything to make them worry about me.

Maybe, I'm too big of a pain and they fear killing me, so as long as I sit in a corner and rant to myself they don't care.

Maybe it's multiple of these possibilities...and these are just the ones off the top of my head.

Instead of trying to make weak-based assumptions about why I'm not dead yet, and this makes you suspicious. Start making assumptions based on more concrete information that you do know, like knowing they've chosen Inzil, Greenie, and Eomer so far. Why them? And then start looking for connections.

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

These two statements are clearly contradictory. Also, you voted for Inzil instead of Eomer, though you were more suspicious of Eomer. Now, I'll buy your reasoning (that you'd suspected Inzil for longer and hadn't been answered), but something about the way you said it doesn't sit right with me.

No they aren't. Think of it as a scale, or even your NogRoa point system. ("This looks good for Nog, this doesn't look good for him"). That's all I was doing with the wolf-on-wolf votes.

In general I tend to believe wolves don't do a lot of pre-planned schemes the first night. They want to get an idea of what people are thinking, the situation...etc, before setting out on concrete plans. Plus, the number of people, points to wolf-on-wolf being votes being less likely.

However, that was not a normal Day 2. Mnemo was under considerable suspicion on Day 1, and started Day 2 under even more suspicion. On top of that she did a 180 character change, this pointed to me that either "a wolf-on wolf, or one of her packmates nudging suspicion towards her, os more likely." The only contradiction is "less" and "more," but think of it as a scale and that I was disagreeing with Eomer saying there were no wolf-on-wolf votes. (Now, we also know that Mnemo voted for Pitchwolf, this makes the wolf-on-wolf possibility again more likely, as Mnemo went sacrificial).

As far as voting for Inzil, I'm not going to say anything, because there's no way to answer it. You buy it, but still some unexplained thing doesn't sit right? That helps.

Absolutes like the above are very bad. You can't say for certainty that a wolf wouldn't say that.

I can. You don't have to believe me, but I can, and I can say it. The burden of proof is on you to prove I'm wrong. If and when you do, I'll be the first to eat a toaster. My methods aren't infallible, but they work for me, but you should also know enough about me by now to know that I'm not going to ignore everything else Lommy does/says because I made a comment about Lommy being innocent because of one word from Day 1.

Putting words in my mouth, are you? I became suspicious of Nerwen because I thought it looked like she was trying to kill Mac. It had nothing to do with saving Inzil.

Oh really?

Long story short, not seeing any "dodgy reasoning" here. I don't trust Nerwen's vote at all, I think that she's a wolf who tried to either kill Mac or save Inzil (or possibly Mnemo... all three scenarios have interesting connotations)

That's an un-altered quote from your post #234. The only alteration is my bolding to add emphasis.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. See my major post near the end of the day we lynched Nienna (don't know the number off the top of my head) for details.

Not wrong. Not wrong. Not wrong. Wolves give as little detail as they have to, because they're lying during a fake reveal and less details means less likely to get caught. The only reason I said I defended Kath, in the infamous fake ranger reveal, is because I had to since you prevented us from killing her.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Boro

There are conspiracies and bold wolvery, but lynching Lottie in a few days, for the reason that she isn't dead yet, ergo she has to be a wolf is ridiculous.

~~~~~~

Lottie, the wolves seemed to have determined even as a revealed innocent you're not a threat, make them regret it.

That made me laugh. And, that's the plan. Now,

++Lommy

Take Two. I don't know if I'll be on before deadline, but it's not looking likely, so...good luck, all.

EDIT: xed with Nerwen and Sally.

[Nogrod]

Give us some info as to who you are quoting Boro... well that goes to everyone of you lazybones...

With about twenty pages of the game it's hard to rememeber whose post any one you quote might be from if it's not the one next to your post...

It's not that hard; just after picking the "wrap" function add = and then immediately after it the name of the person quoted (so no empty space between the = and the first letter of the quoted name). It would really make this much easier to follow.

You might think you are answering to a certain person but without the knowledge of your intention and a host of people playing it would take half an hour at least at this point of a game to find whom one is referring to if one doesn't remember it outright.

Like if everyone actually bolded the names of people they refer to or talk about... trying to go through the thread it's easy to pass important things when people do not bold the names... but if they are bolded, they can be found as well.

Should we next make a deal that everyone not following these rules will be lynched first? I'd love that ruling!



EDIT: X'd from Boro onwards... to whom this was addressed...

[satansaloser2005]

*chuckles*

Ah, Nog, in an ideal world....I'll admit I've gotten really lazy on the bolding though. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't, but when I'm scrolling through a thread I'm always happy to see other people doing it. So often I think we just forget (in the case of bolding at least) and submit our post without doing that kind of stuff.


EDIT: x'd since Nog's

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Like if everyone actually bolded the names of people they refer to or talk about... trying to go through the thread it's easy to pass important things when people do not bold the names... but if they are bolded, they can be found as well.

Should we next make a deal that everyone not following these rules will be lynched first? I'd love that ruling!

That would help. I try to, but I forget a LOT. Then again, there would be too many to lynch in one day...no one remembers all of the time.

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Give us some info as to who you are quoting Boro... well that goes to everyone of you lazybones...

Oh come on now, it's not that hard to follow. I wrapped one of your posts, responded, one of Lommy's posts, responded, wrapped one of Shasta's posts of suspicions against me, and responded. It is not that confusing, I'm not going to put "Shasta" at the end of every quote if I'm responding to different points in one of his posts. All un-named quotes after the Shasta one are from Shasta's same post, except the one that I point out it's from Shasta's #234. Relax yourself Mr. Grinch.

I'm up early and here until 2-ish when I'll have to vote.

[satansaloser2005]

Enough snow that I'm too lazy to go to the office. (Besides, we'd decided to be closed today if it snows, so it works out.) Only three or four posts since I went to bed so I'm caught up, but I'm going to attend to some housework and then look through again and see what there is to see.


I haven't had a snow day since high school. ^_^

[Nerwen]

Hello again... internet went again out for an hour, and now it keeps not letting me quote...anyway...

Originally Posted by Brinniel

It's a good point to bring up, as too often I've seen wolves react in this manner. If any of them are wolves, I'd imagine it's just one as I can't see both wolves reacting in the same way.

For what it's worth, Sally and Shasta crossed.

Originally Posted by Brinniel

Of course, these sort of reactions don't always necessarily mean one has to be guilty, but it certainly doesn't help that all three of them have happened to be on my suspicion list at one time or another.

Of course, it's nothing like proof... it does remind me rather of myself last time I was a wolf, though, puzzling over why those fiends of werewolves killed poor Mac.

Originally Posted by Loslote

Sadly, I can see your point. I wouldn't want to waste the Day's lynch, though. Who knows? Maybe the wolves will be nice and obliging and kill me themselves.

Oh, I can see the point, too– however, Nogrod has been saying, "sadly, we may have to lynch her in a couple of Days" over and over, as though it's already agreed on. Makes me a bit uneasy, especially since Sally's so keen on it, and she's one of the players I trust least at the moment. I mean, it's actually quite unnecessary... all we have to do is not treat you as an unlynchable known innocent.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

then this would be a good way to get the Ranger out of the way, so if a real seer pops up later they would have no defense against accidental lynching.

If you mean a Night kill instead of "lynching" I might understand but otherwise I lost track with you there. I see no reason an innocent would wish to suggest that order but could see the wolves to wish that

Maybe Bes is confusing the Ranger with the Hunter– i.e. thinks it's a kamikaze role? He appears not to understand the rules at all– which could be newbieness, or could be a wolf hiding behind the newbie mask– you know, the usual. *sigh* Perhaps we really should bring in a "read-the-rules or die" law, like people keep saying. Remember Morsul's first game?

Originally Posted by Loslote

Just noting, when I saw that Morsul had posted, my first thought was, "Wait, he's in this game?" It was quickly followed up by, "Of course he is, but he's probably innocent."

Maybe I'm passing him over too much...going from suspecting him just because I always do to not noticing him at all...potentially a problem, but now that I give it some thought, I don't think so... He's not acting like Morwolf.

*shrugs* We've only ever seen one Morwolf, and that was his first game and he was pretending to be the cobbler. I'd forgotten about him too, to tell the truth.

EDIT:X'd with Lommy.

[Macalaure]

Reading along toDay and writing down whatever comes to mind.

Why Eomer? Has anyone bothered to look up what he's been up to? Not sure whether I'll get to today. I guess he was innocent enough to not be considered a lynch for quite a while, but suspected enough (even though it was very vague), to not be an obvious ranger choice. As a wolf, the ranger would have dissuaded me from Lottie or Lommy. Lottie was probably protected last night, but who knows whether the ranger gambled. If they were not afraid of a ranger gamble, then the wolves probably thought that they could make the village paranoid enough to lynch Lottie. Nogrod comes to mind once again.

Why not Boro? He's not getting much suspicion either. I suppose Boro's suspicions are either very wrong or very right.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

the deaths are 6:2 (of which two are resignments, so actually 4:2 gamingwise) but we're having still 10:2.

Werewolf - the only game where winning means not losing too badly.

A lot of chatter going back and forth. I can't read much into it.

Reading over my own analysis. If Nogrod is a wolf, there's been a strong shift in the wolves' behaviour between Day1 and 2. I remember Mnemo suspected Pitch a little, but the next Day Mnemo and Pitch vote each other and Nogrod is after both. I'm definitely getting paranoid, but it all fits together so nicely! It even makes me wonder whether Nogrod and Brinn's clashing was staged.

Originally Posted by Brinn

This game he's been playing pretty smoothly; while he receives some attention it's not too much.

Apart from almost getting lynched on Day1 and being called jumpy? Jumpy/smooth... funny how people's perception differ.

Not happy with your suspicion in general, Brinn. Very vague. I hope you'll make it more solid today.


Can't rep you yet, Lommy, will get to it.

[Brinniel]

Originally Posted by Lommy

Shasta is seeming a lot more innocent to me since he's putting so much effort to the game. It is difficult for me to see a wolf-Shasta analysing stuff so thoroughly. I know that some wolves waste a lot of energy on analyses to look innocent or to get something to say (like Brinn), but some are lazy and avoid analyses because they're so much work and because they can't really profit of them the same way as innocents (like me). I'm not sure, but I think Shasta is more of the latter sort (and this is not an offense, or then it's also an offense against myself too - I think it's more a question of temperament ).

You can't really predict how someone may act effort-wise as a wolf, as it can change each game depending on time, calculated style changes, etc. I don't see how Shasta's high activity makes him more innocent. Why do you think he would be more lazy as a wolf? That could be a very wild guess considering in all the games he's played, Shasta has only been a wolf like twice. One of which I was a wolf with him and I actually recall that he was fairly active, though perhaps my memory is mistaken since that was a long time ago. Anyway, I find it interesting that you use me as an example of a wolf who wastes a lot of energy on analyses considering I haven't made a single analysis and yet you still suspected me yesterDay.

Originally Posted by Mac

Apart from almost getting lynched on Day1 and being called jumpy? Jumpy/smooth... funny how people's perception differ.

Not happy with your suspicion in general, Brinn. Very vague. I hope you'll make it more solid today.

Well, I wouldn't say it's quite suspicion...more like concern. But yes, I know it's vague, which is why I won't make anything of it toDay since I don't have time to look any further into why I'm feeling worried about you.

Also, perhaps my perception is different because I admittingly skim through most of the thread, so I probably miss a lot that others pick up on..

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Oh, I can see the point, too– however, Nogrod has been saying, "sadly, we may have to lynch her in a couple of Days" over and over, as though it's already agreed on.

If we agree on something like that, then of course the wolves won't kill her as they can safely assume we'll take care of her for them if she's still alive in a couple Days. So I agree it's rather ridiculous to say that.

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

The reasoning seems sound, but the fact remains, you voted someone of lesser suspicion over someone of greater suspicion. That's what doesn't sit right with me. That help?

It does, but weren't you the one who voted for Inzil on Day 1 not because you thought he was all that suspicious, but that Mac and Mnemo looked more innocent? It'll be an interesting stat to find out how many times someone actually votes for their "top suspect."

Now wilwa is my top suspect, and I voted for her first, because I wanted to see her lynched 2 days ago, and I still do. I'm slightly concerned about how she looks like the easy lynch that Nienna supposedly was, but also consider this. There's 2 wolves left, if wilwa is one of them, than all the jumps on her today are likely to be innocent driven. If not, than there's definitely wolf involvement.

Originally Posted by Shasta

Fair enough, but I still think it's silly to make that kind of generalization.

Less details may mean less likely to get caught, but more details means more likely to be believed.

We'll have to agree to disagree on those two, but this is what makes WW so fascinating to play all the mesh of styles and opinions.

Originally Posted by Shasta

You should reply to some of my other posts, Boro. I'm trying especially hard to participate today - I did my Grimoire stats and had it brought home to me today that I've been modkilled due to RL issues three (or was it four? I think it was three) times.

I noticed the effort, which based on your track record, I don't know if it really helps...your involvement is kind of scary actually. In all seriousness though, you're pointing this out does look better. I'll try to, I was going to point out your point about Bes looking good because of Pitch saying Lottie should dream of him. But I didn't really see a point since I was just going to agree with you. For some reason, I only feel the need to respond when we disagree...I do not know why that could be?

I also know that you like to make big votes at the DL, but so far the suspicious thing is you have been off. I mean even when you go through great efforts to try not to lynch a wolf (*cough* sally and me */cough*) you somehow do it.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Mac

I guess he was innocent enough to not be considered a lynch for quite a while, but suspected enough (even though it was very vague), to not be an obvious ranger choice.

Oh, fair interpretation of Eomer's suspiciousness, and it would explain all the differences of opinion there.

Originally Posted by Mac

As a wolf, the ranger would have dissuaded me from Lottie or Lommy.

??? What does this sentence mean? It doesn't make any sense to me.

Originally Posted by Mac

Why not Boro? He's not getting much suspicion either. I suppose Boro's suspicions are either very wrong or very right.

Can we lynch Wilwa on these grounds (meaning the latter of course)?

Originally Posted by Mac

Can't rep you yet, Lommy, will get to it.

What's all this talk about repping? And do I get the mammoth post award or are you just grateful for me defending you...?

Originally Posted by Boro

And I didn't call you stupid, so don't say that about yourself.

No, you didn't, but your point more or less assumes so. And that happens in ww all the time: people make points (sometimes out of thoughtlessness) that assume some people are acting stupidly, and no one should be offended by such points or pointing out that the points assume so. And besides, smart people have been doing stupid things (or maybe the word "stupid" is a bit harsh here) in ww since the beginning, everybody makes mistakes. But people still feel naturally slightly annoyed if they are accused of doing something that seems stupid to them and what they haven't done...

Originally Posted by Boro

It aggravates me when people start suspecting me, because I'm not dead by a certain day, because there's no way to defend yourself from those suspicions. Maybe I should just ignore it, but as weak as they are, those types of suspicions snowball, on top of them being really frustrating, because it assumes if I'm not killed by a certain day, I'm a wolf.

Tell me how you would feel if most people were saying (about you): "It's good to keep Lommy around for a few days, because she can be very useful. But if she's not dead by a certain day, she's probably a wolf, therefor she's no more use and it would be a good idea to lynch her." I read stuff like that as...wow I'm only useful up to a certain day, and the only reason I am given those few days is because I can be useful, if I'm innocent. Seriously that's what it sounds like, and it's aggravating.

I don't know why you take it so personally - I said the same logic could be applied against several people, myself included. (Although with me there's less to wonder since I've been suspected more than you, for example, but that's a side issue.) And like I said, I'm casting suspicion on myself on that logic as well, and indeed that kind of suspicion has been cast on me before, not maybe as often as on you (I don't know your history with this) but I know how it feels.

Lastly, I would like to point out the difference between "Boro is still alive, he must be guilty" and "Boro, Nogrod, Mac and Lommy are all still alive, one of them must be guilty". In the first case, there's only one innocent person labelled guilty because he's considered helpful/dangerous and still alive, in the last case one of the four is labelled guilty (and three out of four innocent...) because there's a certain "group" of players that is still alive. It's the same as if all the silent people in the game were still alive at this point or if all the wacky posters were still alive or whatever: it's simply the fact that wolves like to keep people with similar styles around in order not to attract attention to themselves and it has nothing to do with the assumption "if you're a veteran player and no one suspects you, you must be dead by Day4".

There, no need to be so touchy about it. If it comforts you, I suspect Nogrod of all the "veteran loudmouths" by far the most and that would exonerate you and Mac according to this theory...

But in general, my top suspects are out of the aforementioned category. Currently my best guess at it is a Wilwa+Brinn combination (not sure if that works out together, I have to have a look at it possibly).


edit: xed with Boro and Brinn

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

As far as voting for Inzil, I'm not going to say anything, because there's no way to answer it. You buy it, but still some unexplained thing doesn't sit right? That helps.

The reasoning seems sound, but the fact remains, you voted someone of lesser suspicion over someone of greater suspicion. That's what doesn't sit right with me. That help?

Originally Posted by Boro

I can. You don't have to believe me, but I can, and I can say it. The burden of proof is on you to prove I'm wrong. If and when you do, I'll be the first to eat a toaster. My methods aren't infallible, but they work for me, but you should also know enough about me by now to know that I'm not going to ignore everything else Lommy does/says because I made a comment about Lommy being innocent because of one word from Day 1.

Fair enough, but I still think it's silly to make that kind of generalization.

Originally Posted by Boro

Not wrong. Not wrong. Not wrong. Wolves give as little detail as they have to, because they're lying during a fake reveal and less details means less likely to get caught. The only reason I said I defended Kath, in the infamous fake ranger reveal, is because I had to since you prevented us from killing her.

Less details may mean less likely to get caught, but more details means more likely to be believed.

And to reply to the Inzil/Nerwen comment, since my quotes bugged out on me - You're right, I did mention "or save Inzil". The focus of my suspicion was still on the Mac-kill attempt, though.

You should reply to some of my other posts, Boro. I'm trying especially hard to participate today - I did my Grimoire stats and had it brought home to me today that I've been modkilled due to RL issues three (or was it four? I think it was three) times.


Edit: X'ed with Nerwen, Sally, Lottie, Nogrod, Lottie.