WereWolf: A 13 player Seer game

Baggly

Green&Red wrote: »

But there was little or no attention on me my lynch? I don’t think anyone voted for me? People can read for themselves, they’ll see that’s the case

Equating votes to attention is wrong. You were under scrutiny earlier in the day and i suspect your focus on Trit was to allay that earlier attention and lay groundwork for today (which has worked).

Green&Red

Right I really have to listen to what’s going on here!

I’m exhausted after going at it with QB yesterday, I don’t have the energy for it today!

I also don’t believe you think I’m a wolf but I’m argumentative and we’re getting drawn into it with each other.

Baggly

tusk wrote: »

EVERYONE has accused me of being wolf ffs

Yeah but im ahipster Tusk accuser. I was doing it before it was cool.

Baggly

Green&Red wrote: »

Right I really have to listen to what’s going on here!

I’m exhausted after going at it with QB yesterday, I don’t have the energy for it today!

I also don’t believe you think I’m a wolf but I’m argumentative and we’re getting drawn into it with each other.

So hold on, you werent getting attention yesterday, but at the same time, QB gave you a hard time. Mask is slipping GNR.

Green&Red

Baggly wrote: »

Green&Red wrote: »

But there was little or no attention on me my lynch? I don’t think anyone voted for me? People can read for themselves, they’ll see that’s the case

Equating votes to attention is wrong. You were under scrutiny earlier in the day and i suspect your focus on Trit was to allay that earlier attention and lay groundwork for today (which has worked).

It’s a fairly decent metric of attention in fairness

What ground work am I laying for today? Trit is dead!

Green&Red

The only thing I’ve done today is call you out for your slip post yesterday so I could hardly have been doing ground work for that!

Baggly

Green&Red wrote: »

It’s a fairly decent metric of attention in fairness

What ground work am I laying for today? Trit is dead!

Lol which you knew was going to happen, as a wolf! So you post a pre-prepared post noting 'lol i dont know who is gonna die yolo', which has totally come around to you knowing Trit is good, when you spent yesterday unsure about the idea.

Green&Red wrote: »

The only thing I’ve done today is call you out for your slip post yesterday so I could hardly have been doing ground work for that!

Well thats not true. You posted your prepared post too!

tusk

Kitten, kolido, duffers all three of the lowest posters. Can the three of them reasonably be wolves?

duffman13

sKeith wrote: »

Day 1 is over.

Lynch results.

Votee|Voted by
Strawberry Milkshake|tritium, sullivlo, Clarabel, tusk, Green&Red
tusk|kitten_k, baggly, duffman13
kitten_k|Strawberry Milkshake, Whiplashy
quickbeam|kolido
Clarabel|Ectoplasm
Baggly|quickbeam

Strawberry Milkshake has been lynched. The were vanilla villager.

Night 1 commences.


No more posting until after munch results.

Thank you.

There is a wolf in Sully, Clara, Tusk and GnR, possibly two if Tusk flips red. That's my line of thinking.

Kitten cause Strawbs had a vote on her, I'll try delve into a bit more today.

Baggly

Come on Tusky - im online now. You not wanna discuss me anymore?

Baggly

duffman13 wrote: »

There is a wolf in Sully, Clara, Tusk and GnR, possibly two if Tusk flips red. That's my line of thinking.

Kitten cause Strawbs had a vote on her, I'll try delve into a bit more today.

This is my thinking as well.

quickbeam

Alright Baggly, I've gathered some previous posts.


Firstly, there's your jumping on Trit's claim. You weren't the first to do it, that was GnR. But you were second, six minutes after GnR, in post 25, and you kept on about it: post 31, 33, 39, 44.


In post 44 you even said that Trit's plan was never going to work. Well, hey, look at that, he got munched so it did work!




So, okay, I'll admit that that alone isn't reason somebody might be a wolf. So, we go on to your reasons for thinking I'm a wolf.

Baggly wrote: »

I think qb is the wolf. She is doing her sitting back stroking her metaphorical beard thing a lot. Oh and 10k post fluff.

quickbeam wrote: »

You are wrong.

Then late,r in your FFA, repeating what you said above:

Baggly wrote: »

Qb- I don't care about the 10k post but she was being fluffy and sitting back and stirring the pot until I had the audacity to mention her 10k post. Now she is on the game to prove me wrong. Wolfy.

Don't have a third.

It's weak-ass. So weak you couldn't even come up with a third. As a villager I find it hard to come up with FFA lists myself, but doubly so as a wolf. The accusation on myself stood out as I know I'm a villager. I countered it with:

quickbeam wrote: »

That's balls tbh. I just ISO'd myself. I'd 24 posts before my 10,000th, and I would count 6 as fluffy. I can list my ISO if you want.

You never even responded to that. You said I'd changed tact after my 10,000 when some pressure started being laid on me. I absolutely didn't. I'd been productive for at least 18 out of 24 of my pre-10,000 posts. And I continued to be productive afterwards, while still trying to enjoy myself.


This isn't a vendetta. If it was, I'd be ignoring you and focusing on Kolido who actually voted for me last night (that may come yet). We all are a bit self-centred so your weak-ass FFA on me struck me more than Kitten's weak-ass FFA on Ecto, but when she (Ecto) pointed it out, I agreed with her on the similarity. So again, there's a case where someone (Kitten) wasn't attacking me, but I still think her wolfy. It's not personal.




However, I will say this, when looking for above posts, I came across the below from Kitten. Players can click to see the context, but it implies that Kitten thinks Baggly and Tusk could be on a team together. This *could* dissuade me from Kitten and Baggly both being wolves. I've nothing concrete yet, but it's something I've noted.

kitten_k wrote: »

Baggly

duffman13

tusk wrote: »

Kitten, kolido, duffers all three of the lowest posters. Can the three of them reasonably be wolves?

If Strawbs had of flipped red you could possibly make a case even though I know for a fact I'm 100% village

tusk

I feel like sully is flying quite nicely under the radar.

Also, i didn't like how QB asked her to decide how the voting should be carried out. Can't remember if I flagged or not when it happened. But why ask a rrandom unverified player to make such a decision? some people were on board with doing what sully said, and I don't like that.

Baggers, I'm happy with the responses you've had today. You were only slightly on my list, as was clara and I don't think either of you are wolves at the moment so nothing to discuss.

I agree there's at least one wolf in there. It's not me. I was pegging GnR as village from early on, but baggly's retort on him is making me question him.

Clara I think is safe. Sully is worrying me.

kitten_k

tusk wrote: »

Kitten, kolido, duffers all three of the lowest posters. Can the three of them reasonably be wolves?

I'm always going to be on of the low posters every game, this is not gonna change which always leads to me getting accused of being a wolf :rolleyes:

duffman13 wrote: »

There is a wolf in Sully, Clara, Tusk and GnR, possibly two if Tusk flips red. That's my line of thinking.

Kitten cause Strawbs had a vote on her, I'll try delve into a bit more today.

That's not a surprise as Strawberry always assumes I am a wolf, it never has to do with my posts just that she likes thinking I am a wolf.


I have a couple of things to do this morning but then I want to look more closely into Whip. She got a pass from most yesterday as she was mentioned by Trit. But I didn't like her posts coming up to lynch - she kept asking who people were voting and had no problem moving her vote, felt like a wolf trying to make sure they got a vote in the right place.

Baggly

quickbeam wrote: »

Alright Baggly, I've gathered some previous posts.

Firstly, there's your jumping on Trit's claim. You weren't the first to do it, that was GnR. But you were second, six minutes after GnR, in post 25, and you kept on about it: post 31, 33, 39, 44.

In post 44 you even said that Trit's plan was never going to work. Well, hey, look at that, he got munched so it did work!

So, okay, I'll admit that that alone isn't reason somebody might be a wolf. So, we go on to your reasons for thinking I'm a wolf.

Then late,r in your FFA, repeating what you said above:

It's weak-ass. So weak you couldn't even come up with a third. As a villager I find it hard to come up with FFA lists myself, but doubly so as a wolf. The accusation on myself stood out as I know I'm a villager. I countered it with:

You never even responded to that. You said I'd changed tact after my 10,000 when some pressure started being laid on me. I absolutely didn't. I'd been productive for at least 18 out of 24 of my pre-10,000 posts. And I continued to be productive afterwards, while still trying to enjoy myself.

This isn't a vendetta. If it was, I'd be ignoring you and focusing on Kolido who actually voted for me last night (that may come yet). We all are a bit self-centred so your weak-ass FFA on me struck me more than Kitten's weak-ass FFA on Ecto, but when she (Ecto) pointed it out, I agreed with her on the similarity. So again, there's a case where someone (Kitten) wasn't attacking me, but I still think her wolfy. It's not personal.

However, I will say this, when looking for above posts, I came across the below from Kitten. Players can click to see the context, but it implies that Kitten thinks Baggly and Tusk could be on a team together. This *could* dissuade me from Kitten and Baggly both being wolves. I've nothing concrete yet, but it's something I've noted.

Great! Thank you!

So on your first point. I said his plan to persuade people there were multiple seers wouldnt work. And it didnt. So you have taken that way out of context. Bad start for your ISO.

Second point. FFAs. So i didnt change my mind on my suss of you, and that wolfy? I didnt have a strong third candidate at the time, so i didnt put a token one forward. Explain how that is wolfy.

Third point. You did change tact. You got aggressive. Thats not you unless you have something to hide. You tried productivity and i accused you anyway. You saw i thought you were wolfy and switched from productivity to aggression to try to dissuade me from sussing you.

So imo, thats three main points that have you suss of me which ignore the context of what i was saying. How is that productive or useful?

tusk

kitten_k wrote: »

I'm always going to be on of the low posters every game, this is not gonna change which always leads to me getting accused of being a wolf :rolleyes:



That's not a surprise as Strawberry always assumes I am a wolf, it never has to do with my posts just that she likes thinking I am a wolf.


I have a couple of things to do this morning but then I want to look more closely into Whip. She got a pass from most yesterday as she was mentioned by Trit. But I didn't like her posts coming up to lynch - she kept asking who people were voting and had no problem moving her vote, felt like a wolf trying to make sure they got a vote in the right place.

I feel like yesterday was a complete farce,for me anywya.

So I'll be taking most things as fresh from here on out.

Baggly

tusk wrote: »

I feel like sully is flying quite nicely under the radar.

Also, i didn't like how QB asked her to decide how the voting should be carried out. Can't remember if I flagged or not when it happened. But why ask a rrandom unverified player to make such a decision? some people were on board with doing what sully said, and I don't like that.

Baggers, I'm happy with the responses you've had today. You were only slightly on my list, as was clara and I don't think either of you are wolves at the moment so nothing to discuss.

I agree there's at least one wolf in there. It's not me. I was pegging GnR as village from early on, but baggly's retort on him is making me question him.

Clara I think is safe. Sully is worrying me.

Bolded bit is a good point imo.

kitten_k

tusk wrote: »

I feel like yesterday was a complete farce,for me anywya.

So I'll be taking most things as fresh from here on out.

I think yesterday was a farce for everyone - to much defensiveness all round. People should be able to call out / question people without them getting defensive! It's what the game is all about.

tusk

Baggly wrote: »

Bolded bit is a good point imo.

Let's not agree with each other too much, they already think we're on a team because of my mistake in ffas.

*note, this is supposed to be on the game thread fellow villagers. It is not a slip from a backroom that I'm not part of so please don't go down that track. I'm having a laugh...

quickbeam

tusk wrote: »

Also, i didn't like how QB asked her to decide how the voting should be carried out. Can't remember if I flagged or not when it happened. But why ask a rrandom unverified player to make such a decision? some people were on board with doing what sully said, and I don't like that.

This is fair. Though I did ask initially for everyone's opinion on whether we were racing or not, but got no firm answer and as I was running out of time, I asked Sully as she had been the one to compile the FFAs. I'm not "on board" with doing what Sully says, but she was as good as any for an opinion since everyone else seemed to be "on board" with her compiling the FFAs. In the end I went with my own gut and didn't vote for those in the race, mainly because GnR had dissuaded me from being a wolf by that time and I had no strong inclination for anyone else in the race, especially not Strawbs, or myself!

Baggly wrote: »

Great! Thank you!

So on your first point. I said his plan to persuade people there were multiple seers wouldnt work. And it didnt. So you have taken that way out of context. Bad start for your ISO.

Second point. FFAs. So i didnt change my mind on my suss of you, and that wolfy? I didnt have a strong third candidate at the time, so i didnt put a token one forward. Explain how that is wolfy.

Third point. You did change tact. You got aggressive. Thats not you unless you have something to hide. You tried productivity and i accused you anyway. You saw i thought you were wolfy and switched from productivity to aggression to try to dissuade me from sussing you.

So imo, thats three main points that have you suss of me which ignore the context of what i was saying. How is that productive or useful?

Yeah, it is a bit wolfy to stick to your guns and not be flexible with your opinions on players. When I'd provided you with evidence that you were wrong, you didn't consider it and make an adjustment, or even comment about how my evidence wasn't good enough to dissuade you. And absolutely, not giving a third is a sign of being a wolf (not proof positive, I grant), but villagers had 12 people to choose from for our FFAs. Wolves, effectively had only 10, so it makes it harder to make up reasons against people that you *know* are not wolves. I've had plenty of experience of being a wolf, especially of late, so believe me, I know the difficulty in compiling FFAs as one.


I would really like some evidence of my change in tact. I didn't even get aggressive to your first accusation. I just said "you are wrong" (hell, if it was Clara she'd be accusing me of being a wolf for being too smooth with my response there - can't win!! ). It was when you came down with information that was spurious that I countered. I argued strongly perhaps, but I was not aggressive. It's a game, which I enjoy playing, why would I be getting aggressive about it?

duffman13

quickbeam wrote: »

Anyone up for a CFD on Baggly?

Otherwise, I could get on board a Kitten lynch?

Depending on how Baggly and Kitten go, this post shouldnt be forgotten. Would have been way more interesting if Strwabs flips red but if Tusk flips red then its also interesting.

*Just to note, I am seeing a lynch as Tusk as giving us a lot of info but in a game of small margins, we really need to find a wolf. Personally my wolf lean is on Tusk at the moment but I dont wanna fall down a tunnel even though I am finding it hard to avoid on Tusk

quickbeam

kitten_k wrote: »

I have a couple of things to do this morning but then I want to look more closely into Whip. She got a pass from most yesterday as she was mentioned by Trit. But I didn't like her posts coming up to lynch - she kept asking who people were voting and had no problem moving her vote, felt like a wolf trying to make sure they got a vote in the right place.

My first post post-munch said that Whippy was cleared as wolves would have known Trit wasn't the seer if Whippy was among them, and left him to be lynched instead.


But I think you actually make a good point. A clever wolf might munch Trit in the hope of putting Whippy in the lock-clear village group?



I still have village lean on her, but, I guess it's something to think about.

tusk

quickbeam wrote: »

Yeah, it is a bit wolfy to stick to your guns and not be flexible with your opinions on players. /QUOTE]

QB you're knocking it out of the park with your answers to things people are using to accuse me hahaha.

2 in a row. Cheers.

tusk

Feck. Quote Fail

quickbeam

tusk wrote: »

QB you're knocking it out of the park with your answers to things people are using to accuse me hahaha.

2 in a row. Cheers.

Yeah, but there's being flexible, and there's being all-over-the-shop :P

kitten_k

tusk wrote: »

I feel like yesterday was a complete farce,for me anywya.

So I'll be taking most things as fresh from here on out.

quickbeam wrote: »

My first post post-munch said that Whippy was cleared as wolves would have known Trit wasn't the seer if Whippy was among them, and left him to be lynched instead.


But I think you actually make a good point. A clever wolf might munch Trit in the hope of putting Whippy in the lock-clear village group?



I still have village lean on her, but, I guess it's something to think about.

I have seen wolves being cleared for less. I am not accusing her yet as I haven't looked back over her posts but I just don't want her to fall into the village core without anyone actually looking at her.

kitten_k

Don't know why Tusks quote is still showing there

quickbeam

GnR, could you explain, in baby-words, your feelings about Baggly and the "slip" post. I don't really understand where you're coming from with that.

You'll notice, Baggly, that I haven't included any of the "slip" stuff in my own suspicions of you.

Baggly

quickbeam wrote: »

This is fair. Though I did ask initially for everyone's opinion on whether we were racing or not, but got no firm answer and as I was running out of time, I asked Sully as she had been the one to compile the FFAs. I'm not "on board" with doing what Sully says, but she was as good as any for an opinion since everyone else seemed to be "on board" with her compiling the FFAs. In the end I went with my own gut and didn't vote for those in the race, mainly because GnR had dissuaded me from being a wolf by that time and I had no strong inclination for anyone else in the race, especially not Strawbs, or myself!

Fair enough re; the following Sully explanation (i suppose). Dont buy it re your vote. Think you were distancing yourself in the votes from the mislynch you knew strawbs would be.

quickbeam wrote: »

Yeah, it is a bit wolfy to stick to your guns and not be flexible with your opinions on players. When I'd provided you with evidence that you were wrong, you didn't consider it and make an adjustment, or even comment about how my evidence wasn't good enough to dissuade you. And absolutely, not giving a third is a sign of being a wolf (not proof positive, I grant), but villagers had 12 people to choose from for our FFAs. Wolves, effectively had only 10, so it makes it harder to make up reasons against people that you *know* are not wolves. I've had plenty of experience of being a wolf, especially of late, so believe me, I know the difficulty in compiling FFAs as one.

I would really like some evidence of my change in tact. I didn't even get aggressive to your first accusation. I just said "you are wrong" (hell, if it was Clara she'd be accusing me of being a wolf for being too smooth with my response there - can't win!! ). It was when you came down with information that was spurious that I countered. I argued strongly perhaps, but I was not aggressive. It's a game, which I enjoy playing, why would I be getting aggressive about it?

So first paragraph - you are saying if i threw up an arbitrary third, thats better than the 2 i sussed? I disagree. I also disagree that its difficult for a wolf to come up with a third. Thats crazy logic to find wolves with. Surely the incentive is on wolves to provide three names to influence the FFA results more?

Second paragraph - ill do this analysis later. Im running into a meeting for an hour. Aggressive / strongely argued. Choice of words aside, either way, change in tact, by your own admission above.