WW LXXXIX: The Terror of Tol Fuin

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by G55 about me

´An hour before DL she still didn't have any solid opinions on anyone, which is quite strange, because there has been enough going on yesterDay. She said that "none of the arguments really convince" her in #128. She was very quick to jump on Shasta's reasoning - right he was to suspect Lottie as we know toDay, but how would I have known yesterDay? - in #140. Moreover, she was around for some time - less than I have, but still - and didn't post anything except for some shaky impressions. Unnaturally quiet as well, considering the heaps of information.

To tell you the truth, I came around way too late yesterDay, my brain was totally not on ww mode (I last played in January or February?) and I was distracting myself with other stuff and failing to concentrate on the game as much as it would have deserved. This all explains my (admittedly) poor performance yesterDay, but like I've said, it will be improved toDay. I was somewhat suspicious of Lottie (if I recall correctly I was suspecting her and Eomer the most) but had no real proof for it so I was really happy to jump on Shasta's reasonable-seeming case of her - I desperately needed to suspect someone a bit more seriously with the deadline and the necessity to vote looming rather close. It was not very "professional" but it's the truth about what happened.

Originally Posted by G55

I'm still thinking about this. She voted for Lottie (who we now know is a wolf), but apologises for it. Of course, that could be an innocent thinking she's going on a Lottiewagon, but it could be something much more sinister. I'm more inclined towards the former, but you never know!

I felt like apologising a little because I considered my own reasoning shoddy (based on a not-so-strong gut-feeling and someone else's arguments) as well as that I was lacking the conviction to really want anybody dead at that point and especially because Lottie with her controversial manner is so often the obvious choice for lazy thinkers on Day1.

Kit - I don't understand how you can read my posts and reach the conclusion that I thought Lottie was innocent at any point. I had to check as it perplexed me that you said that: I most definitely first said I'm unsure, then thought she looks worse for being squishy, then named her and Eomer my feeble top suspects and after Shasta made his case kind of seriously started to suspect her. (And yes, I had a moment of doubt when she posted a reaction that seemed innocent to me but then I decided she was still my best bet and voted her.)

Originally Posted by Nilp

Has never 'seen Lommy so decisive! Especially on Day 1! Something to consider...' (He referred to a post 79 of hers, which actually was Kit's )

I believe he referred to my rather waffly post a few post before Kit's and was being sarcastic.

Originally Posted by Nog

It is interesting that Kit decided to concentrate her effort toDay (well, thus far) into close-reading those who got LottieWolf lynched. Now wolf-on-wolf votes do happen every now and then and I'm not suggesting some people should be made immune or putting them beyond suspicion just because they voted / lynched a wolf. But Kit's priorities look interesting: like she wishes to turn the discussion away form somewhere else?

Interesting observation, but I cannot fathom what she'd be so desperate to steer the discussion away from, unless she and G55 or Sally are the remaining wolves (then she definitely would like to present new targets, but if I recall correctly, her interactions with the two don't really look like that). I have to agree though that when a wolf was lynched, it is rather funny to start eyeing those who lynched her suspiciously - it doesn't seem very much like innocent logic. I mean, an innocent would want to pose the question "did anybody try to defend/save Lottie?" first (I imagine), while a wolf is more likely to go down the "let's analyse the bandwagon" path because she doesn't have to figure out who's evil and who's not.

Originally Posted by Nerwen to Nog

Are you talking about Lottie's claim that she "didn't know Kit was playing"? I don't know– it was, of course, suspicious, with hindsight– but it might have been meant as a more general "look at me, I'm a clueless innocent" ploy, rather than having anything to do with Kit herself. On the other hand (or paw) Lottie did make quite a point of it: at #106 she says, Did I miss something? I could well have - I totally forgot Kit was playing at all, I might have forgotten there was a cobbler, too...

I have to say that as a wolf I have a few times been tempted to make a list and intentionally omit a fellow from there and claim it was an accident (as I accidentally omit people every now and then) to seem less like fellows, but I always decided not to do it because it felt dishonest. So Lottie's Kitanna comment seems interesting to me, because I know from personal experience it's something that could occur to a wolf but on the other hand I'm not sure if Lottiewolf would like to lie intentionally any more than mewolf...

Originally Posted by Mith

I would point out that this fascinating little Ranger twist (dont' remember anything quite like it in games I have played),means that while in ranger games the wolves will always have weigh the risk of not getting a kill against trying to get the players most dangerous to them out of the way - and if there are readable seer hints it will alert both Ranger and wolves potentially. This game there is the risk that one of them will die as well as not getting the desired kill. Dependent on how likely the surviving wolves feel any potential Seer is to have dreamt of them early they may think that risking another dream and getting a more certain kill is a better path than going for the most obvious first and possibly starting day 2 down to a lone wolf (even with seer/ranger out of the way). OK that was a verbose way of saying that the choice of Shasta may not be of major significance.

Now this passage seemed rather fishy to me. Don't get me wrong, it's good to try to get into the wolves' heads and try to reconstruct their thinking and she's making sense, but this is rather complicated especially as Mith implied she's not at the height of her brainpower at the moment. Ok, even if we allow that even a Mith with not the best of her brainpower can come up with advanced wolf thinking theories there's still the most eyebrow-raising part: the last sentence. It really looks like Wolf Mith wrote her genuine thoughts there and then to downplay her complicated thinking by saying it was just a verbiose way of saying that the choice of Shasta might not be so significant.

[Mithalwen]

No it was just the coffee was kicking in and having read through to make sure it made some kind of sense I realised that is what it boiled down to.I was trying ot make it clear having been queried on my mention that it is suspicious not to know the rules theory which seemed quite obvious to me.

I was thinking about the significance of the Ranger issue yesterday as I mentioned in one of the posts. I was up to the rather simple task of relating actual events to previously considered hypostheses on the game structure in my fragile state. What I wasn't up to but am going to try is to try and sort out the far more complex webs of interactions and analyses thereof .

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Interesting observation, but I cannot fathom what she'd be so desperate to steer the discussion away from, unless she and G55 or Sally are the remaining wolves (then she definitely would like to present new targets, but if I recall correctly, her interactions with the two don't really look like that). I have to agree though that when a wolf was lynched, it is rather funny to start eyeing those who lynched her suspiciously - it doesn't seem very much like innocent logic. I mean, an innocent would want to pose the question "did anybody try to defend/save Lottie?" first (I imagine), while a wolf is more likely to go down the "let's analyse the bandwagon" path because she doesn't have to figure out who's evil and who's not.

I'm never terribly fond of the "good-votes-are-really-bad-votes" meme myself. I seem to recall times it's got so out of hand that the baddies could quite openly go after the very people who'd helped take one of them down.

Still, you must admit it has often been the case that a wolf jumps on the bandwaggon. With last Night's, I suppose it would most likely be you (thought Seer-Shasta had dreamed Lottie) or Nog (just throwing his hands up). That said, the dynamics of yesterDay aren't the kind where you can say there definitely had to be wolf-on-wolf voting... so it's a bit of a dead end at the moment.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

again today, pretty much soon as Inzil opens the new day, both of them are posting and defending their votes.

Because neither of us did it properly yesterDay. If all the Lottie-lynchers could just say "what Shasta said" and vote, my vote had to be explained, especially because I didn't comment too much on Lommy before.

Here we have Loslote defending both of them yesterday.

Lottie defended me? She didn't vote me (for whatever reason. I mean, Eomer did, and later Sally), but she seemed to suspect me quite strongly! I was the only person she had anything to say about.

I promise not to just pick on you two but you both worry me quite a bit!

I seem to worry everyone qite a bit... :P and so does Sally...

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

I have grown a bit unsure about Galadriel toDay, because of her rather strongly defensive posting. I mean, it is mostly just defense. Sure, there are some accusations or suspicions from Kitanna and such, but her first post toDay starts with defense of her actions yesterDay - was it necessary? Or does she just feel over-threatened?

Yesterday in RL I was so tired I could barely finish that reply to Kit, and I said that all of my own thoughts and notes will wait till today.

I'm doing it again, aren't I?



OK, so something of content. Finally.

Suspicions of Kit go up. She suspected quite a few of my posts in her ananysis basically repeating the general attitude only after everybody else said pretty much the same thing. Before (when she debated Sally and Bom further) there wasn't anything fishy enough about them. Not enough to comment, at any rate.

An approximate timeline (only the relevant posts)

Kit makes the posts suspecting both Bom and Sally, but more the former.
I comment.
Greenie analyses my post.
I reply to Greenie.
Kit makes a note about Greenie's post, says Bom stil looks worse than Sally.
Greenie replies to my reply to her.
Eomer: "G55 has defended Sally about three times!"
Eomer: "The jump on Bom is bewildering."
Kit flipflops on Sally and says that she is not more suspicious than Bom.
Eomer calls my original comments to Kit "the most suspicious thing yet posted"
Kit votes Sally.


Now if my posts were so suspicious, why didn't Kit ever make a note of them before? Plus, Greenie&Eomer both questioned them. However, now that Pretty-much-Everybody decided that I'm fishy, she suddenly finds them odd.


Suspicions of Lommy floating midway (explained in previous posts).


Legate still sounds good, even though I've gone from "quite reasonable" to "somewhat suspicious" in his books.


Eomer is still a mystery.


Mith I don't quite get toDay. Her post in #205 confuses me. What's weird is that she posted a lot, but she never got in the thick of the arguments. Maybe not evil, but weird.


Nerwen's arguments look innocent enough, although she continues to be aloof. I don't detect traces of fur on her, but she's so far away there that it's hard to see. :P


Nilp didn't post anything of content.


More to come a bit later.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Nilp didn't post anything of content.

I see that we shall be getting along grandly.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

You ought to know by now, Legate, that no-one can ever get a clear picture of me!

Too true, since you're jumping around so much.

I don't know what to think of you either (of course I'm tempted to say you're evil, since you voted me twice already, and that's an evil thing to do! ).



#67 - nothing much. Introduction. Says we have a "careful village"

#69 - voices his suspicion/disagreement (?) on me and Sally

#70 - nothing of importance

#73 - "The jump on Bom is bewildering."

#84 - thinks Bom's post is funny

#89 - calls my post "the most suspicious thing yet posted"

#97 - makes sure he can highlight

#100 - votes me

DAY2

#199 - questions Nip and Lottie's "conversation"

#200 - "Sally and G55 seem completely intent on making people suspicious of them": we defended our votes

#202 - examines Lotties possible connection with me.

#203 - Says that Lommy's case is interesting. Wants to examine it.

#214 - thinks that Kit is NOT hypocritical

#216 -
[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

That's an entirely different kettle of fish, dear Nilpaurion, and one which I shall investigate posthaste!

#218 - corrects Kit about Lommy

#219 - votes for me again.


How can one possibly get a clear picture of him when he jumps around so much?

Edit: xed with Lommy

[Kitanna]

Has anyone seen Bom? I found him worth a second look and now he's disappeared completely.

Suspicions of Kit go up. She suspected quite a few of my posts in her ananysis basically repeating the general attitude only after everybody else said pretty much the same thing.

My first post of today said I'd be looking at you for just that reason. I wanted to know why people found you so suspicious. Seeing as you got two votes yesterday it seemed fairly reasonable to me I should see why.

It is interesting that Kit decided to concentrate her effort toDay (well, thus far) into close-reading those who got LottieWolf lynched.

I missed a lot after my vote post. The biggest thing that happened was the death of known baddie, Lottie. So, I proped deeper. And this is not where I'm solely concentrating effort, it's where I started.

Like I said in my last post I wanted to take a look at Mith. I'm not sure what to think of her. And that feeling goes for a lot of others.

Mith:
1) Nothing much, some banter for Nilp
2) Asks why Shasta doesn't want to post (he had stated he was thinking of waiting until jokes ended and serious playing began)
3) Nothing useful
4) Here she says she finds it suspicious to not know the rules. She stated later this is a way to give the impression of a confused innocent.
5) Nothing useful
6) Not much
7) Nothing useful
8)

I don't know what Sally is playing at though. It is ten days til she says she has to go and in a game this size it is unlikely to be an issue. And apart from the ethics of participating in a game knowing you may not be able to see it through, I can't see any benefit of drawing attention to it so far in advance. I may be being thick but I can't see it being a helpful tactic for any role we have in the game. A hunter needs to get themselves killed to fulfil their purpose but we don't have one and it would be impossible for a Hunter to be in a position to make a good call that early in the game.

This is what she had to say on Sally.
9) Nothing useful
10) Nothing useful
11) Clarifies to Legate what she meant about not knowing the rules and wolfishness
12) Further clarification
13) Nothing useful
14) I think she's talking to Sally here about voting last minute. Not much else of note
15) Responds to Sally, saying I have clearly had an effect on her
16) Says Sally seemed the most suspicious so far and added a vote count. Also will look at Lottie
17) Says she's going with her strongest pick which happens to be Sally
18) More of the "not knowing the rules can be evil" debate
19) Douglas Adams
20) Asks Lommy if this be a bandwagon for Lottie
Day 2:
21) Makes a note of the ranger role and the twist it has added. (if you don't know what I mean check out the admin thread for clarification)
22) Continued rules jargon
So what to think about Mith. I stated before there was something about her posts I found strange, but not necessarily fiendish. I'm still of this mind, which might be what she's going for. She seems utterly fixated on the rules and those who "make a show" of not knowing them. Returning to this topic once or twice doesn't worry me, but she kept going back, even into today. She really only mentioned Sally and Lottie as possible choices in two posts. For Sally the only reason I could see was for her vote was based on Sally's ordo reveal in her second post. But even then she didn't seem to voice strong convictions about it. And she just says she wants to look harder at Lottie, but doesn't say anything about what she learned or if she did. Mith has been fairly vocal, but hasn't said much of interest. It's hard to pin her down, which is unsettling. I have no idea what to think of Mith even now. She's worrying, but it's hard to get any theories to stick to her. Oh Mith, you hurt my brain.

I feel one wolf may be a submarine at this point. Someone no one has really looked at or who hasn't gotten any suspicions thrown at them. There are four I can think of off the bat (Nerwen, Greenie, Eomer, and Nilp), but if I had to time to scrutinize everyone's posts from yesterday I'm sure I could find more.

Unfortunately due to errands and RL duties I can't keep doing that. I had more I wanted to look at (Lottie and Nog and the submarines) but I simply can't. For now I'll have to content myself with the here and now. I'll be back in a few hours.