TIG XCIV– WHere the Stars Are Strange (Game thread)

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Sallywhosenamebeginswithanuppercaseletterunlikeher usernamewhichbeginswithalower

So, if you go with the assumption that the Acolyte kills every Night, yes, they are evil, but as far as numbers in the tally, the wolves are a bigger issue. We currently have ten people, which means we have nine people, which means we have three wolves and six goodies (and then of course the Acolyte). If we go after the Acolyte toDay and succeed, we will be in the same position toMorrow, except worse after the Night's kill. If we go after a wolf and succeed, we improve our numbers, which, granted, will decrease over the Night. Consider, however, the fact that the werewolves could kill the Acolyte, or the Acolyte could target one of the wolves. Thus, our more pressing issue must be the wolves, as they are a cohesive (mostly) unit, whereas the Acolyte, while a definite threat, is one man/woman.

This is sound reasoning.

But Sally, while you're in such a reasonable mode, can you explain this thing you said yesterDay:

Originally Posted by Sally #266

Steve's reveal is in line with my own thoughts (and if he's lying, as previously mentioned, I can kill him, which is equally fun).

Why the singular and "kill", not "lynch"?
(No, before you get upset, I'm not saying you're the Acolyte, I'm saying you've been toying with the role, and I can't see why you should do that while insisting that the A. is evil.)

[satansaloser2005]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

But Sally, while you're in such a reasonable mode, can you explain this thing you said yesterDay:

Why the singular and "kill", not "lynch"?
(No, before you get upset, I'm not saying you're the Acolyte, I'm saying you've been toying with the role, and I can't see why you should do that while insisting that the A. is evil.)

Okay, first of all, I'm retracting my apology for not responding to this sooner. Not because of what you said, mind, but because it was said at insane o'clock and thus something I missed until now.

And to answer your question honestly, I don't know why I phrased it like that. I had of course meant that I would be advocating his lynch, and I'm guessing I used the singular because I would then gloat if he turned out to be lying after all, but I don't know why I phrased my statement the way I did.

I will, however, ask you to stop saying that I "toyed with the role," when I've done nothing of the sort. Thinking about it, yes, but not toying with it.


Or, as they say in Limerick....

Though I know my word choice was strange
You inquired past my hourly range
So now I've replied
Your suspicions belied
I'd thank you for a tonal change