WW LXXXII: Return to Tol-in-Gaurhoth

[Boromir88]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I keep think about the "who did Shasta dream?" question. I think it has to be either me (innocent) or Pitch (wolf).

In support of the theory that it was me we have the fact that the wolves and Ranger both picked the same person, suggesting that they were following the same line of reasoning. Now, the wolves, unlike the Ranger obviously wouldn't have seen me as a "dreamed innocent" if they knew that the Seer's dream had been one of them.

Hmm, usually the early kills are either set for who the wolves think the Seer is, or to be trailless. We know the former option wasn't on their mind last night.

The ranger's mind was on the same page as the wolves last night, but I don't think the seer dream would have been much of a consideration. Like you said, if one of the wolves thought they were dreamed, then they wouldn't be considering killing a "dreamed innocent." But even if they didn't think one of them was Shasta's dream, with how trailless and little Shasta's posts were, they couldn't find any obvious clues that would lead us to the "dreamed innocent" to be all that concerned about killing the "dreamed innocent." That's a bit jumpled, but in summary, I think now you're over-complicating it.

In support of the theory that it was Pitch, we have Shasta's otherwise inexplicable "case" on him. We also have, perhaps, the fact of the huge bandwagon. I'm still not sure who was driving the thing, but it surely had wolfish involvement– could the wolves have picked him as the Seer, and taken the opportunity to get rid of him?

Reading through yesterDay, I can't see any good reason for Shasta to act as he did unless he'd got a wolf– and yet Pitch nowhere sounds wolfish, except perhaps in his vote-post.

I agree that band-wagon had wolvery written all over it. With regards to Pitch, the only thing that looks more worse for him is his first response to Lottie (about Shasta) was...

Originally Posted by Pitch, #48

On the Shasta-Lottie thing: Basically, Lottie's saying "I do suspect him in earnest, but I could be wrong" - and of course she could, such is the lot of an ordo, therefore it's trivial and she might as well not have bothered to say it. Peppering her suspicion with disclaimers like that does have a smell of wolvish caution, and it doesn't help that I don't see anything remotely worrying in that quote of Shasta she started her suspicion from.

He would later adjust his tune to suspecting Shasta more and eventually voting for him. Of course people change and waffle back and forth, but it may be worthy to point out. He first seems to regard the Lottie-Shasta trifle as a trivial row between 2 innocents, but changes to suspecting Shasta.

I'm beating on the same drum about that band-wagon (and I'm skeptical of Nogrod suggesting it was justified because Shasta was so obviously suspicious), but Nerwen's absolutely right that's got wolf prints all over it. I think Legate, or Nerwen, or someone had mentioned this early but worth saying again. When you have that type of attention and battle between two people usually there is a much mroe even split and division, and there was none, which suggests wolves pushed a bandwagon onto Shasta.

Now this doesn't mean they were protecting a bandwagon against a wolf-Lottie, maybe they saw an opportunity to implicate both by getting a bandwagon against Shasta, but at the same time framing an innocent-Lottie to make it look like they were protecting her.

I can't tell who drove it either, but I do know this. Greenie gives her 4 possibilities and seems to take the side that Lottie looks more innocent than Shasta. Nerwen interprets it differently and seems to think of the two Shasta looks more innocent (correct?) So there's the split, and you've got Shasta of course saying Greenie's reasons for defending Lottie were junk.

Greenie and/or Nerwen could be wolves here to put more focus on the two, however for now I think they were both commenting on the first spark of action in the day that wasn't cobbler talk. What's more suspicious is everything after the split of opinion, everyone piles onto Shasta.

The talk evolves into a "wolf on wolf" between Lottie and Shasta, and in those situations it really should be 50-50, with how people interpret things differently, but instead it was all a thumbs up for Greenie's post and Shasta looks more suspicious. Which, is also suspicious, I mean what was so spectacular about Greenie's post (no offense Greenie)? What it essentially was is...here's 4 possibilities between Lottie and Shasta, any one of them is equally possible? I also recall a lot of Shasta is getting very aggressive and defensive (so latching onto Lottie's self-admitted "gut feelings") to pile against Shasta.

That whole situation after Greenie and Nerwen's differing opinions (and it's important to add Legate's vote for Lottie because he felt of the two Lottie was more suspicious) is wolvish. You should see a continued even-split in votes and what we get is consistent several pats on the back for Greenie's post, and a move to "Lottie and Shasta look wolf-on-wolf...Shasta looks like the wolf more than Lottie!)

One thing away from the band-wagon yesterday, to say to is about Wilwa's self-vote. It may be the frustration of having a meaningless vote, but it looks pretty weird and flippant. More like a cobbler signal to the wolves though than a wolf casting a meaningless vote. She said she never had the chance to vote for herself, seems to have wanted to and now was as good of a chance as any, but also find yourself a good opportunity to say "Here's your cobbler wolvsies," Wilwa?

Pre-edit: because I've got distracted by an outside convo and this post has taken longer than anticipated, so I'm sure I've crossed. Nerwen's post that I reply to here is the last one I read.