WW LXXIX: Fall From Olympus

[Kath]

Bedtime for me - as I said it'll be early votes from me!

++BLIND GUARDIAN

There have been a lot of people throwing one liners out. It's Day 1, it's normal. But from most of those with one liners there seems to have been at least something a little useful, at least since some actual discussion started. From Blind Guardian we have two posts about the actual game itself, and neither is constructive:

1: Hello people I am here. But I have to leave. So...MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN!

2: Sorry I'm not much help. I'm very confused. What the heck are you talking about!?! Well, I have to go. I'll be back before DL.

Well something did happen. Lots happened! And if you're confused don't just put that as a random statement - make clear what you're confused about so it can be explained! If it's the false Seer business I'm sure neither Rikae or phantom would mind explaining it again if it means they get to argue more. On the subject of which, it's too early to tell whether that's innocents/guilty parties/bluffs etc, but it will definitely leave points for discussion in later Days.

Having literally just read Greenie's post I don't agree with her view on Mac. I thought he was making the point that if one saw hints in Boro's mentioning of Zeus then one had to see the same in Nerwen's mentioning of Hades, not that he actually thought that Nerwen's mention was suspicious. Because he said (about the Boro one):

It doesn't make sense, but it's definitely deliberate and not a slip. My bet would be a lover leaving a hint for their mate, except that that doesn't really make sense either.

Which I thought meant he didn't really think it was a hint. Maybe Mac will clear that up at some point.

And that's it from me for toDay.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Kath

Having literally just read Greenie's post I don't agree with her view on Mac. I thought he was making the point that if one saw hints in Boro's mentioning of Zeus then one had to see the same in Nerwen's mentioning of Hades, not that he actually thought that Nerwen's mention was suspicious. Because he said (about the Boro one):
"It doesn't make sense, but it's definitely deliberate and not a slip. My bet would be a lover leaving a hint for their mate, except that that doesn't really make sense either."
Which I thought meant he didn't really think it was a hint. Maybe Mac will clear that up at some point.

Now there is actually a huge difference in suspecting Zeus and Hera calling each other on the thread (which is not a thing they would need to do as they already know each other) than suspecting that Hades is trying to send a message to Persephone (which would make a lot of sense as the latter really needs to find the former for their love to become true).

Now as suspicions go on Day1 I find it perfectly justified to suspect Nerwen for being Hades and searching for Persephone, but the way Mac states it in a most vague way - praising Wilwa's notice of it, saying it's "definitively deliberate" and not a slip - but that it doesn't make sense raises my eyebrows considerably. What were you trying to say? Downplay Nerwen's possible guilt by bringing the idea to the fore? That would be bold and not smart. But Kath's defence of Mac looks odd as well. Just as Mac manages to say Boro's remarks were deliberate and not slips but hints, she says Mac meant they were not hints... Oh my. There's something fishy in here but it's hard to say what. Too many possibilities of which most don't make sense (I see I'm following Mac's and Greenie's reasoning here )