Werewolf XV - Greendale Community College

Jake WW

Angus WW wrote: »

Jake You ask and I shall reveal,

I felt Barb deserved a rattling to see what fell loose, Barbs answers suggest shes no a Chang in sheeps clothing and along with Marys observation (that Chang wouldn't know they are Chang and thus couldn't activate himself as an SK) gave me good cause to back down from her. I purposefully asked was she defensive to see what shook, so while I feel she isn't chang, I felt she was shook enough to seem rattled (cosying up to me).

So I rattle Gabs cage after he pops up against Barb, I feel hes very defensive so I ask him the same thing. I don't like his theory, he put it out there to confuse us. Why Do I think this? Because its not a theory worth putting out their. It be a horrible rule and to suggest it seems very off to me.

So while Im not 100 percent hes a wolf, I believe hes leading the pack in my lynch vote. (No Pun intended)

So jake, while we are questioning everyone, Whats your thoughts on others?

Ive been open about Barb and Gab, you share your feelings on the pair boyo.

Okay, plausible answer. Though all and every suspicious behaviour can be explained away by the excuse of "I was just rattling cages".

I've zero opinion on Barbara one way or another, and Gabriel (as I already said) made some good, well thought out posts against you, so is either a genuine villager, or a clever wolf finding holes in players' posts in order to divert away from their team-mates'. I haven't decided yet.

As for everyone else, I'm pretty open as to who might be good or bad right now. Nobody has stood out for me majorly, and unless something huge happens before lynch, my vote will probably be mostly random.

Riona WW

Angus WW wrote: »

Marys observation (that Chang wouldn't know they are Chang and thus couldn't activate himself as an SK) gave me good cause to back down.

Question for both you and Mary here...


Mary, is kevin not a character? Did kevin not know he was kevin and thus chang after he recovered from changnesia?

Angus, did you question this or just accept it?

Jake WW

Jake WW wrote: »

As for everyone else, I'm pretty open as to who might be good or bad right now.

Actually not quite true. I do have an idea on one player being a goodie, but I'm obviously not going to say who.

Jake WW

Actually, just want to explain FFAs to any newbies among us who might not like to ask and out themselves as a newbie.

FFA stands for Free For All. You pick three players that are top of your list for being a baddie and give reasons why you might think they're bad. All votes are compiled together and the top three are raced in a lynch vote. You don't say who of the three you're voting for though.

In order to find FFA votes easier when checking back, you prefix your list of three with a hashtag and end it with the number of the lynch - so, this being the first lynch, you'd type: #FFA1 - suspicious of A because [reasons], B because [reasons] and C because [reasons]. Tomorrow if we do FFA again you'll make your list as #FFA2, etc.

Isla WW

#FFA1

Frank
Holly
Derry

Abigail WW

Jake WW wrote: »

Okay, plausible answer. Though all and every suspicious behaviour can be explained away by the excuse of "I was just rattling cages".

I've zero opinion on Barbara one way or another, and Gabriel (as I already said) made some good, well thought out posts against you, so is either a genuine villager, or a clever wolf finding holes in players' posts in order to divert away from their team-mates'. I haven't decided yet.

As for everyone else, I'm pretty open as to who might be good or bad right now. Nobody has stood out for me majorly, and unless something huge happens before lynch, my vote will probably be mostly random.

Ugh please don't randomly vote. I like what you're saying apart from this, but random votes don't garner any data for later use.

What do you think of racing Angus and Gabriel and AN other? I genuinely feel we can get info from this

Jake WW

Isla WW wrote: »

#FFA1

Frank
Holly
Derry

Reasons?

Jake WW

Abigail WW wrote: »

Ugh please don't randomly vote. I like what you're saying apart from this, but random votes don't garner any data for later use.

What do you think of racing Angus and Gabriel and AN other? I genuinely feel we can get info from this

Well, not literally random, there'll be some gut instinct / best guesses involved in casting the vote, but first night is pretty random otherwise.

But yes, Angus v Gabriel might be a goer. The FFAs are already looking like it'll be them anyway.

Abigail WW

Jake WW wrote: »

Well, not literally random, there'll be some gut instinct / best guesses involved in casting the vote, but first night is pretty random otherwise.

But yes, Angus v Gabriel might be a goer. The FFAs are already looking like it'll be them anyway.

Ok, so we have till 8.59pm? If we get enough FFAs in by say... 7? We run with that? Otherwise we go to the... sigh.... blind vote.

I just don't like it because the wolfies can co ordinate their blind votes whilst the villagers can't, so I don't think it will help us in the long run

Isla WW

Jake WW wrote: »

Reasons?

When you paint a target on your back, always be wary of the ones who shoot first without question.

As our lord said let those without sin cast the first stone.

Stones have been cast and I never trust anyone who goes against the word of our lord.

Sometimes I lie bleeding in the water just to watch the sharks circle, I look into thier eyes untill the fishermen bring them to slaughter

Abigail WW

Isla WW wrote: »

When you paint a target on your back, always be wary of the ones who shoot first without question.

As our lord said let those without sin cast the first stone.

Stones have been cast and I never trust anyone who goes against the word of our lord.

Sometimes I lie bleeding in the water just to watch the sharks circle, I look into thier eyes untill the fishermen bring them to slaughter

*Sniffs* I have no idea of your alignment, but that's some deep sh1t there.

Brought a tear to my eye, sister:(:(:(

Katie WW

There's a chance Angus and Gabriel are both innocent.

So that's why I'd be worried about FFAs so quick; it's a good chance for wolves to focus all attention on two people and away from themselves.

Abigail WW

Katie WW wrote: »

There's a chance Angus and Gabriel are both innocent.

So that's why I'd be worried about FFAs so quick; it's a good chance for wolves to focus all attention on two people and away from themselves.

Fair point. I just don't think the blind vote will be helpful either and there's very little to go on so far.

The first lynch is always the worst

Jake WW

Katie WW wrote: »

There's a chance Angus and Gabriel are both innocent.

So that's why I'd be worried about FFAs so quick; it's a good chance for wolves to focus all attention on two people and away from themselves.

Absolutely they could be. But that's why the more FFA votes cast, the more likely we will have one wolf in the race.

Liam WW

I really think day 1 is far to early to have an FFA. I know I would be blindly following someone and that is a waste of an FFA. I am pretty sure others will just pick from others FFA as well.

I am not suggesting a blind vote, but maybe just say who you plan on voting.

Jake WW

#FFA1:

Derry - in most games looking at the lowest posters is a valid tactic, but I think in this game with a rule stating a minimum of 10 posts per 24 hours, the wolves will make damn certain to meet the quota. Therefore I've ignored everyone under 10 posts, and gone for the next lowest, ie, Derry. Feeble maybe, as it could be one of those on 11 or 12 posts just as easily, but I have to start somewhere.

Steve - the weird double post mimicry that he seems unwilling to explain.

Angus - in the Gabriel v Angus feud, I'm not really heavily invested in either of them being wolves, but would tend to believe in Gabriel more. This might be a bit of an easy, jump-on-the-bandwagon vote, but as I said, it's hard to come up with three the first night (actually even later in the game, it's often no easier!)

Jake WW

Liam WW wrote: »

I am not suggesting a blind vote, but maybe just say who you plan on voting.

That's even worse. Wolves can then definitely co-ordinate their votes to make sure one of their own isn't hit.

Mary WW

Riona WW wrote: »

Question for both you and Mary here...


Mary, is kevin not a character? Did kevin not know he was kevin and thus chang after he recovered from changnesia?

Angus, did you question this or just accept it?

Kevin is a character, he knows hes kevin but also obviously knows he has some power but its not active. Kinda like the hulk in a previous college I was at. Im assuming that kevin didnt know what activated him and didnt know what would happen once chang was active.

Katie WW

Jake WW wrote: »

Absolutely they could be. But that's why the more FFA votes cast, the more likely we will have one wolf in the race.

On what grounds?

It looks like an FFA is going to result in Angus and Gabriel, with 90% of the other possibilities ignored. I wouldn't think it's likely to hit a wolf at all right now tbh.

Derry WW

Jake WW wrote: »

#FFA1:

Derry - in most games looking at the lowest posters is a valid tactic, but I think in this game with a rule stating a minimum of 10 posts per 24 hours, the wolves will make damn certain to meet the quota. Therefore I've ignored everyone under 10 posts, and gone for the next lowest, ie, Derry. Feeble maybe, as it could be one of those on 11 or 12 posts just as easily, but I have to start somewhere.

Steve - the weird double post mimicry that he seems unwilling to explain.

Angus - in the Gabriel v Angus feud, I'm not really heavily invested in either of them being wolves, but would tend to believe in Gabriel more. This might be a bit of an easy, jump-on-the-bandwagon vote, but as I said, it's hard to come up with three the first night (actually even later in the game, it's often no easier!)

That's a pretty weak argument for me there Jake.

Liam WW

Jake WW wrote: »

That's even worse. Wolves can then definitely co-ordinate their votes to make sure one of their own isn't hit.

So you would prefer I just pick 3 people from other peoples FFA if I don't have anyone on my radar to pick myself? I don't agree it is worse. I think FFA gives wolves a place to hide. If a few folk pick 3 who are def non wolves, they follow suit and they hide.

Abigail WW

Liam WW wrote: »

So you would prefer I just pick 3 people from other peoples FFA if I don't have anyone on my radar to pick myself? I don't agree it is worse. I think FFA gives wolves a place to hide. If a few folk pick 3 who are def non wolves, they follow suit and they hide.

The only thing about this is that we will be able to see that pattern tomorrow or the next day. The first lynch is nearly always a tough one to call but it gives us info we can use at a later stage.

Also, you can pick apart some of the reasoning the wolves may give as it becomes apparent it was wafer thin or just plain lies.

I'm against a blind vote for that exact reason.

Jake WW

Katie WW wrote: »

On what grounds?

It looks like an FFA is going to result in Angus and Gabriel, with 90% of the other possibilities ignored. I wouldn't think it's likely to hit a wolf at all right now tbh.

If neither Angus or Gabriel were wolves, which is a possibility, but certainly not definite as one of them could be a wolf - or, with a very small possibility both of them could be evils, with one wolf and one SK between them.

But the more votes we get in, the more likely that others will come to the forefront. In fact, as it stands with four FFAs cast, only one of the above is leading, with three more in second place. If we get more votes it could be any one of the other three that ends up raced.

FFA shows that statistically we are more likely to get a wolf in a race. It doesn't mean it's guaranteed, and it may not be guaranteed tonight. But it is about the "wisdom of crowds" that usually means there is a wolf raced*, especially with a decent number of votes. Four so far probably wouldn't be enough.

* of course, I acknowledge with wolves also contributing the FFAs, the wisdom of us all collectively is slightly reduced, but it still usually works out.

Jake WW

Derry WW wrote: »

That's a pretty weak argument for me there Jake.

You at the thesaurus there Derry? I said as much.

Jake WW wrote: »

#FFA1:

Derry - in most games looking at the lowest posters is a valid tactic, but I think in this game with a rule stating a minimum of 10 posts per 24 hours, the wolves will make damn certain to meet the quota. Therefore I've ignored everyone under 10 posts, and gone for the next lowest, ie, Derry. Feeble maybe, as it could be one of those on 11 or 12 posts just as easily, but I have to start somewhere.

Isla WW

Wolves who laugh at mistakes may not be seeing the whole picture

Jake WW

Liam WW wrote: »

So you would prefer I just pick 3 people from other peoples FFA if I don't have anyone on my radar to pick myself? I don't agree it is worse. I think FFA gives wolves a place to hide. If a few folk pick 3 who are def non wolves, they follow suit and they hide.

No. If you don't have anyone on your radar, vote for your best guess. What I'm against is alerting the wolves in advance of who you'll be voting for.

So, best option - FFA for the reasons explained above (good chance of a wolf in the race, even if not actually raced).

Next best - blind vote (wolves can't hide).

Worse option - advising who you're going to vote for so wolves can easily manipulate their votes based on where the votes are headed.

Jake WW

Jake WW wrote: »

No. If you don't have anyone on your radar, vote for your best guess. What I'm against is alerting the wolves in advance of who you'll be voting for.

So, best option - FFA for the reasons explained above (good chance of a wolf in the race, even if not actually raced lynched).

Next best - blind vote (wolves can't hide).

Worse option - advising who you're going to vote for so wolves can easily manipulate their votes based on where the votes are headed.

Fixed.

Also another plus for the FFA is, as Abi has said, it gives something to go back on later to see patterns.

Derry WW

Jake WW wrote: »

You at the thesaurus there Derry? I said as much.

You might aswell close your eyes, throw the names of all students on the floor and pick three up.

Usually, the group focus's on lower poster members who have kept quiet. Generally I have tried to post helpful or query things that have not really had responses. I thought that you were trying to be helpful but think your logic of "middle plus 1" post count to be extremely random.

There are posters who are certainly acting stranger then me, but your single minded focus on my post count, while completely ignoring (and not even referencing) anything I have said is mindboggling. I cant even defend a "your post count" accusation other then I have posted when I thought relevant, like most people .

Ironically, if you said you had "a hunch" against me, I would of been less suspicious then "middle post +1" explanation. .

Abigail WW

Derry WW wrote: »

You might aswell close your eyes, throw the names of all students on the floor and pick three up.

Usually, the group focus's on lower poster members who have kept quiet. Generally I have tried to post helpful or query things that have not really had responses. I thought that you were trying to be helpful but think your logic of "middle plus 1" post count to be extremely random.

There are posters who are certainly acting stranger then me, but your single minded focus on my post count, while completely ignoring (and not even referencing) anything I have said is mindboggling. I cant even defend a "your post count" accusation other then I have posted when I thought relevant, like most people .

Ironically, if you said you had "a hunch" against me, I would of been less suspicious then "middle post +1" explanation. .

The ONLY thing that put you on my radar was Isla claiming they seer checked you. But then promptly claimed arse bandit.

So, hence, I let it go (for now, anyways). A quick scan through your posts shows nothing to me apart from your amusing 'spunkwaffle' quote. I may use that in the future:P:P

Jake WW

Just reading back, and I'll add to my reason for including Angus in my FFA his proposal to have Ass Crack come out.