Werewolf - Mario vs Sonic - SONIC WORLD

Mary WW

Desmond WW wrote: »

How do you know Phil is a her? Been chatting in your backroom?

It's a typo, but I doubt I will convince you otherwise.


Can you explain why you are so strong on Phil originally? if you had something strong to go on that'd actually be great. We need something

Vernon WW

Phil WW wrote:

Listen, as I said earlier, when I posted this morning about "there looks to be tasks so I'm weary of giffers," that was a hilarious light weight "shading". If Vernon hadn't made such a massive deal out of it, I would have moved quickly on. It honestly wasn't an attempt to throw genuine shade. It was just looking through the rules, noticing there was no "No Tasks" rule, and then pointing out that gifs could be seen as such.

Again, Phil.... you're misleading the class...

Phil WW wrote:

Also, no "There are no tasks" warning, coupled with the fact the first scheduled kills can change (as Mary pointed out) means I'm already throwing people who are giffing into a Suspects pile.

Phil WW

Vernon, you do realise EVERYONE goes into a suspect pile 15 posts into this, yeah? :pac:

Vernon WW

Phil WW wrote:

Vernon, you do realise EVERYONE goes into a suspect pile 15 posts into this, yeah?

You were quite specific though. Your words, not mine.

Vernon WW

And of course it was lightweight shading. That's exactly what wolves want, to mislead people down a line of thinking and not have their wolfy prints all over the flip when they turn out to be village.

And I say this confident in my own right of being a villager, but haven't a clue of Angus alignment.

But again, you made the link initially so stop trying to spin it any other way. You've been told this by multiple people now.

Vernon WW

Phil WW wrote:

Vernon's reaction to what was a minor observation, one made more in jest than in seriousness, set me on him. The fact he's ticking every bloody box I'd have written up for a "How to catch a wolf" checklist hasn't helped.

Interesting. Can you give us a rundown on your 'How to catch a wolf' checklist?

Phil WW

Vernon WW wrote: »

Interesting. Can you give us a rundown on your 'How to catch a wolf' checklist?

The only reason I'm holding off tbh is that I'm aware there's a 10% chance you're a goody playing a hilariously poor game here, pushing this to such an extent if/when I die, it will be impossible for you (and the village) to dig up.

Vernon WW

Phil WW wrote:

The only reason I'm holding off tbh is that I'm aware there's a 10% chance you're a goody playing a hilariously poor game here, pushing this to such an extent if/when I die, it will be impossible for you (and the village) to dig up.

:pac: or you're just a wolf throwing out mundane statements without anything behind them...

Mary WW

I understand Vernon having Phil on his list of Dodgy posters due to potentially throwing shade on him with the gif post.

I understand Phil thinking Des is dodgy due to him suggestung the Vig shoots him. I suppose I also get that the difference in response to his gif post between Angus & Vernon might make him sus of Vernon.

Des was the strongest in terms of his accusation imo considering he was suggesting Phil get shot. Want to catch a wolf so would like to know what made him so certain about him.

Feels like at least one of these should be a wolf given how they are going at each other.

Angus WW

Mary WW wrote: »

I understand Vernon having Phil on his list of Dodgy posters due to potentially throwing shade on him with the gif post.

I understand Phil thinking Des is dodgy due to him suggestung the Vig shoots him. I suppose I also get that the difference in response to his gif post between Angus & Vernon might make him sus of Vernon.

Des was the strongest in terms of his accusation imo considering he was suggesting Phil get shot. Want to catch a wolf so would like to know what made him so certain about him.

Feels like at least one of these should be a wolf given how they are going at each other.

So, you believe there are two active wolves?
So that leaves only 1 in the 4 inactives.
and 2 in the 6 actives.

It would be so much better if there was only 1 active wolf.
That would leave 2 in the 4 inactives
and 1 in 6 actives.

Phil WW

Mary WW wrote: »

Des was the strongest in terms of his accusation imo considering he was suggesting Phil get shot. Want to catch a wolf so would like to know what made him so certain about him.

As it stands, I'll be voting Desmond tonight. Simply cause I see two scenarios.

1. Desmond and Vernon are both bad, and are trying to make me an easy mis-kill for the village.

2. Desmond is bad, Vernon is good, and Desmond was trying to capitalise on the stuff between me and Vernon.

Des's accusation, and his post about the vig, makes it hard for me to see a scenario he's good in though.

With Vernon, I see a remote possibility that he's not bad. Remote.

Mary WW

Angus WW wrote: »

So, you believe there are two active wolves?
So that leaves only 1 in the 4 inactives.
and 2 in the 6 actives.

It would be so much better if there was only 1 active wolf.
That would leave 2 in the 4 inactives
and 1 in 6 actives.

At least 1 doesn't equal 2.



I've no idea who is a wolf tbh but given how they are all so after each other I would think there is one in the 3 of Des, Vern & Phil.


I would also think there is at least 1 in the inactive group but I of course have nothing to base that off cos they have given us nothing to go off but percentages would alude to that at least.


Rugby starting now...

Gabriel WW

Hello all

Gabriel WW

Angus WW wrote: »

The question friend or foe, is not the same as village or baddie, but I would have to know your allegiance to be able to answer that, but i do not know your allegiance.
Therefore, from my not knowing if you are friend or foe, you should be able to surmise if i am village or if i am baddie, so your subsequent question is a useless redundant question.

I mean you're not wrong in that there is a big difference between the two questions but you're expecting us to believe the bit in bold here in order for the rest of your sentence to make sense.

Gabriel WW

Angus WW wrote: »

Are you suggesting here we lynch into the mutes. I'm not against it, but how do we decide between the mutes?

Unless you think there are two baddies in the amongst the ones yet to post (at the time of you posting this) then it's not a great strategy.

Gabriel WW

Katie WW wrote: »

reasing thru now. all standard with exception of those crystals

Standard? There are only ten of us here. That's not quite the usual.

Desmond WW

Phil WW wrote: »

Morning all.

Initial thoughts are I love starting with a small group. 10 people really means it's easy to form opinions on everyone, and hard to hide. 4 rolled goods, 3 rolled bads, and 3 unknowns. So you'd imagine 7 vs 3.

Though, someone correct me if I'm wrong, it doesn't actually specify an exact number of baddies. I'd be attributing the vagueness of win conditions to a possible dimension collapse for now though.

I hate the thoughts of evil shamans.


Also, no "There are no tasks" warning, coupled with the fact the first scheduled kills can change (as Mary pointed out) means I'm already throwing people who are giffing into a Suspects pile.

Text book early wolfing I'm afraid. Throw a little general non-specific shade to look involved but really its just fluff so can't be called hard on it.

Phil WW wrote: »

Mary, I like you :P You've answered before I could get there. But yeah, I don't see anything about there being no tasks.

Very much reads to me as "Mary, I have definitely never met you wink wink" Mary defending another player for no reason, the start of me thinking "Why defend another player? A wolf trying to help another wolf out?"

Phil WW wrote: »

I probably should have thrown a smilie or something, but when I say things like "I'm keeping an eye on the giffers", I mean that I'm keeping an eye on people trying to sneak by tasks in general.

Smacks of a Wolf caught in their throw general light shade tactic.

Phil WW wrote: »

Mate, you're being super jumpy if you took that post as some personal shot against yourself, and trying to drag Angus in too is interesting.

Still, at least I've got a larger read on yourself anyway. Considering we're just starting, it's curious that you're trying to drag yourself into a big argument over a very general initial thought. But hopefully I can count on others to start getting as involved as you are.

Phil WW wrote: »

Vernon, I've got zero intention of getting into a spat with you cause you're paranoid over a post that was quite literally labelled as "initial thoughts", especially since I have a feeling it's fuelled in part by the fact only three of us are actually posting this morning.

Brendan WW
Clodagh WW
Gabriel WW
Katie WW
Liam WW

All to post.

The above two go together. Wolf is trying to disengage from unexpected confrontation. LOOK AT THESE OTHER PEOPLE NOT POSTING GUIZ

Phil WW wrote: »

With, like, 10 posts and nothing else to draw attention yet? Sure, as a throwaway thought.

Trust me Vernon, I've numerous other reasons to be worried about you now anyway. But I've also zero intentions of getting into a spat because we're the only ones posting.

Numerous reasons to be suspicious of Vernon, mentions none of them. Not even going to discuss them in fact. A Wolf in panic that theyre in D1 trouble and can't find a way to disengage.

Phil WW wrote: »

Not ignored it at all Vernon. Just not gonna be dragged down a rabbit hole this morning. Would rather get a read of the field before I tunnel one person.

See above. Still no mention of the numerous reasons to be suspicious of Vernon.

Phil WW wrote: »

Hey Angus, I just wanted to point something out.

That’s now Vernon AND Desmond tying you into a partnership with Vernon. Whether it’s with your knowledge or not, they are looping you in so that if anything bad happens with Vernon, you’re tied to him....

I quoted & explained this already.

Desmond WW wrote: »

Vig could take a shot at phil and narrow down our lynch options?

Despite it being a wolfy action apparently, Phil completely ignores this for quite a while. Worried I might be right Phil?

Phil WW wrote: »

The only reason I'm holding off tbh is that I'm aware there's a 10% chance you're a goody playing a hilariously poor game here, pushing this to such an extent if/when I die, it will be impossible for you (and the village) to dig up.

90% sure on D1 is pretty good I would have thought. Why not get behind it?

Mary WW wrote: »

It's a typo, but I doubt I will convince you otherwise.


Can you explain why you are so strong on Phil originally? if you had something strong to go on that'd actually be great. We need something

That's my reads on Phil, Mary. I'm taking your "her" slip as a little of the backroom where real identities are known coming out into the main thread. That and you've been floating around on Phils side of things, until you were called on it.

I'm voting for Phil tonight

Desmond WW

If we're doing an FFA list here's mine

#FFA1

1. Phil
2. Mary

Angus WW

Gabriel WW wrote: »

I mean you're not wrong in that there is a big difference between the two questions but you're expecting us to believe the bit in bold here in order for the rest of your sentence to make sense.

It was directed at the questioner, Vernon, so the only person I cared to believe me at the time was him. The expectation for anybody else to believe it is yours, not mine.
Do you have any questions other than your statement towards me?

kitten_k

Players should only concern themselves with their own World. Posting from or discussion of Mushroom Kingdom is not allowed

Phil WW

Still waiting on

Brendan WW
Clodagh WW
Liam WW


Yeah?

I'd hate to think we're at 4 vs 3 here, with three villagers not logged in yet....

Gabriel WW

Angus WW wrote: »

It was directed at the questioner, Vernon, so the only person I cared to believe me at the time was him. The expectation for anybody else to believe it is yours, not mine.
Do you have any questions other than your statement towards me?

Even so, your statement that you don't know if someone is friend or foe requires the belief of whoever you were responding to in order for the remainder of your sentence to carry any weight. Do you think the questioner at the time believed you when you said you don't know if they are friend or foe?

Angus WW

Phil WW wrote: »

As it stands, I'll be voting Desmond tonight. Simply cause I see two scenarios.

1. Desmond and Vernon are both bad, and are trying to make me an easy mis-kill for the village.

2. Desmond is bad, Vernon is good, and Desmond was trying to capitalise on the stuff between me and Vernon.

Des's accusation, and his post about the vig, makes it hard for me to see a scenario he's good in though.

With Vernon, I see a remote possibility that he's not bad. Remote.

While Des makes a good case against you, I see the total of your case against Des as, you have to be bad because you are calling me bad, but there is a niggle that you are good.
People get accused all game.
If you want me to vote Des with you, you are going to have to come up with way better reasons.

Phil WW

Angus WW wrote: »

While Des makes a good case against you, I see the total of your case against Des as, you have to be bad because you are calling me bad, but there is a niggle that you are good.
People get accused all game.
If you want me to vote Des with you, you are going to have to come up with way better reasons.

Its not just "Des called me bad ergo he's bad".

At the moment, it's the entire manner in which he swept into the thread, and nearly his first contribution is to call on the vig to shoot someone. And then AFTER that, he starts combing through my posts (in a really lightweight way) to justify his belief I'm bad. He didn't check first and then decide I was bad; he decided that was the narrative he wanted to run with, and shaped his subsequent posts around it.

He also just ran with Vernon's narrative too, trying to take it and push it harder. He's working backwards, which I don't believe a villager should be. The pairing of me and Mary over what he reads as a slip is also part of that too.

I'm trying to figure if Des and Vernon are working together, or if Des just took Vernon's suspicions and mirrored them to try and create the snowball.

Angus WW

Gabriel WW wrote: »

Even so, your statement that you don't know if someone is friend or foe requires the belief of whoever you were responding to in order for the remainder of your sentence to carry any weight. Do you think the questioner at the time believed you when you said you don't know if they are friend or foe?

Either they were bad, and they knew I was being truthful in my statement that I didn't know, or they are good and they didn't know that if I knew the answer or not.
I know that I didn't know if they were friend or foe at the time, so I know I was not lying.
Do you believe that you have caught me out telling a lie there?

Vernon WW

Phil WW wrote:

I'm trying to figure if Des and Vernon are working together, or if Des just took Vernon's suspicions and mirrored them to try and create the snowball.

If Des is village (which I have no way of knowing at this time) then I'm gonna go ahead and say we are working together.

Mary WW

Half time almost over so while I can

#FFA1

1. Des - The most Wolfie thing so far imo was him suggesting who the vig should shoot on Sunday after so few posts themselves without a smoking gun for that person

2. Phil - Contradicts no.1 I know. Des' case against Phil does make sense, nowhere near enough for someone to have gone as strong against them as they did imo but we don't have a lot of info on this first day and it is a strong enough case to make me wonder and put them in my top 3.

3. Katie - As of right now this one is very likely to change before vote time. Vernon to me is very defensive, especially if you compare his response to Phil's gif thing to say Angus' response but overall I'm not sold he's a wolf. I think there is a wolf in the low posters but there is nothing to tell between them. Katie in her few posts has said absolutely nothing but said it right when people were talking potentially focusing on the inactive posters.

Desmond WW

Mary WW wrote: »

Half time almost over so while I can

#FFA1

1. Des - The most Wolfie thing so far imo was him suggesting who the vig should shoot on Sunday after so few posts themselves without a smoking gun for that person

2. Phil - Contradicts no.1 I know. Des' case against Phil does make sense, nowhere near enough for someone to have gone as strong against them as they did imo but we don't have a lot of info on this first day and it is a strong enough case to make me wonder and put them in my top 3.

3. Katie - As of right now this one is very likely to change before vote time. Vernon to me is very defensive, especially if you compare his response to Phil's gif thing to say Angus' response but overall I'm not sold he's a wolf. I think there is a wolf in the low posters but there is nothing to tell between them. Katie in her few posts has said absolutely nothing but said it right when people were talking potentially focusing on the inactive posters.

Calling for a vig is good for many things. One being; seeing the way you and Phil have been singing exactly the same song in coming out against it. Phil I can understand. You? If it's a wolf play, then you've got your next target once Phil comes up village. I think you've gone a bit over board trying to take heat off your wolfy team mate.

Angus WW

#FFA1

1. Liam - I think Vernon made a respectable case against Liam. I think it is probaly the better of the 3 suspects I have

2. Clodagh - The second best case i have is the sheer audacity of clodagh to think she can clear day1 without saying a word.

3. Brendan - This one is the weakest of my three suspects and as of right now this one is very likely to change before vote time.

Phil WW

Angus WW wrote: »

#FFA1

1. Liam - I think Vernon made a respectable case against Liam. I think it is probaly the better of the 3 suspects I have

2. Clodagh - The second best case i have is the sheer audacity of clodagh to think she can clear day1 without saying a word.

3. Brendan - This one is the weakest of my three suspects and as of right now this one is very likely to change before vote time.