Try to keep on the topic of accusation ;)
evilbutterfly, your idea got owned.... this isn't even considering the chance that a wolf comes in and claims to be the seer.
I have to say, I've completely given up the though that EB is a wolf, if that was his goal and I got fooled, congradulations, I'm instead going to have to switch my vote to lightdarkness. 'but,' you say, 'he's the only one who HASN'T done something to earn suspect.' Exactly. I suppose it's a little random, but at least maybe it'll get the guy talking a bit more.

I hate both the AIM bombing, AND the being hungry.

I have to say, holy crap @ 60 hour voting periods. How long is this going to take with 2 and a half days per cycle?

This is an extremely absent-minded defense. The reason I voted for you was that it was your idea to guard 1 person over and over again.

Can you think of any other interpretation for those words other than "the guardian should protect the same person multiple times in a row?" Yet for some reason this is the idea you accuse me of holding, and yourself of decrying, when in fact the exact inverse is true.

#2, most certainly, which is exactly the strategy you lambasted in your earlier post, which at this point most would assume was made by an entirely different person.

I'm sorry? You claim that I accept your faulty ideas and that you accept my wise ideas, and then you spin it around to make it look like I'm distorting the truth?

Who's mistaking whom for whom?

Anyone with intelligence can figure out you're full of crap.

Good point, but I am not in control of the guardian and I know that, I know I can't control the guardian. It was just a bit of advise. You seem bent on the fact that I'm some how controlling the guardian. The guardian is free to do as he pleases, an idea that I cannot stress enough. I view my advise much more differently than you do. I know what I'm thinking, but I can't put it into the words I want to. Is tasselfoot not a valuable person to the humans? I feel I'm safe to say that he is. I don't want him to get wolfed. Of course, I am assuming he is human, but he hasn't givin me any evidence to prove otherwise. Of course, we can see the results of a guardian guarding the wrong person, and no one wants that.

Honestly, we can't have this bickering. The only person I really feel might be a wolf is ld, but I'm not comepletely sure of that.

And I was talking to ld when I said he had me mistaken for you. He said I said it was good for the wolves if the guardian protected only one person, when I clearly didn't say that. You said something like "if one person is guardianed that leaves the wolves free to kill anyone else." So, am I wrong?

We can't have bickering?

Then what's going to make us vote, you dumbass?

Oy, looks like it went from one mini-war to the next. Chardish, aren't you the one who said these things only detract from the humans and help the wolves? You guys calm down.

All Cypher did was state the obvious, that the guardian ought to protect Tass because he's important to the humans (if he's human).

All Chardish did was point out the obvious that protecting Tass so much could lead to another human defeat if he's a wolf (as was the case in the last game).

The problem is that you are both jumping to way too many conclusions are too little info. Just because either of you points out the obvious is no reason to cry wolf and bicker. Your lil spat isn't helping anything.

Now back to the matter at hand. I'm still undecided in voting. All this fighting among players is just distracting me, so for now I'm confused. Please you guys, be civil about your suspicions. I'll check back in later and see if some more reasonable stuff is posted and maybe read over the 9 pages of Day 1 (good lord this is taking a long time).

Qreepy, I am just agreeing with whoever said bickering between humans is what the wolves want. How do we vote? Well, let's not hope we vote for someone who just pissed us off. That's a waste.
I vote by looking at peoples posts (and votes, but since this is the first round, there are no locked votes as in, people can change their votes [which I also look at]). Since when did people have to bicker to post?

You just assumed that everyone bickering is human.

This is possible, but I still find it quite unlikely.

It's also, by direct correlation, insinuating that you know who the wolves are and are not, because of who is bickering is completely human.

People have to bicker to DISPUTE EVIDENCE and PROVE PEOPLE INNOCENT/GUILTY.

Honestly!

Why would a wolf bicker and bring so much attention to himself? And you don't have to bicker to dispute evedince. You can talk about it, but you don't have to call them a dumbass or be malevolent in your posting.

...Wolves argue in every game necessary.

It happens like that.


And malevolence is excellent.

I'm not assuming they're both humans. I, like others, kinda suspect Chardish a little bit. Not enough to change my vote or anything, but I just feel a vibe from him I'm not liking.

Anywho, discussing calmly is better than bickering. Bickering makes us angry and makes it harder for us to think, and people do stupid things when they act out of anger. I just think if people stopped getting into 1 on 1 disputes and stopped belittling each other (there have been many instances of calling people stupid and other mean things) that things may actually get done. Arguing distracts us from the whole and makes us focus on the people combating each other. Even if one is a wolf, this isn't good, because we may miss EXTREMELY wolfy activity from others. Seriously you guys, debate things like the intelligent people you should be and let's get this thing figured out.

We have 60 hours to get over bickering. So big whoop.

And just "figuring things out" doesn't work, either, because (whoa!) there are WOLVES trying to MISLEAD THE HUMANS. And they usually do a damn fine job of it, too. So arguing has to occur.

ld gets my vote because he's the only one who I strongly feel might be a wolf.

I wish I could whip out some clever rebuttle to the people that have voted against me, but I can't.

Theres nothing more that I can say other than that I am human, and i'm not mad for your votes, the first round is random(ish), and thats just how it goes.

However, i'm still keeping my eye on some of the comments that have been made in this thread.

cypher, you are on my suspicious list... so i'm curious to hear your reasoning for voting LD. alain already voted him, and his reasoning is that LD is the only person NOT being suspicious... is that your reasoning too? because generally not being suspicious doesn't give you a strong feeling for being a wolf. and, since i am thinking of voting for you, i'd like to know your logic, perhaps to get a better understanding of why you are voting the way you are.

Basically, I viewed it as a bandwagon vote with false evidence.

I, for one, expected LD to be a little more active. He was in the other games he's played, and the only other people who haven't posted much at all are sleepless and whorlichan (and, to a lesser extent, roopert, but he's always been fickle like that), who are usually quiet, and Afro, who's completely new to this. This doesn't say a whole lot against LD as far as I'm concerned, but it's more that he's quiet than he's suspicious.

Though there are a few people I'm looking at, but Moogy is still my primary concern, for the reasons I stated earlier.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

I would've voted for you much earlier, but I waited to talk to a few people on AIM to hear their reasoning, to put down my vote.

That doesn't explain the false evidence part of my claim.