scorri would like Benzo to point out where scorri has "defended" the Pokemon. scorri has in fact been saying that the pokemon should be lynched. scorri is in fact currently voting a pokemon because she believes they are an anti-town faction. scorri does not like this representation of her actions.
Werewolf XVIII: Dimensional Clash: Wolves/Outlaws Win!
- Thread starter Pikamaster
- Start date
scorri would like Benzo to point out where scorri has "defended" the Pokemon. scorri has in fact been saying that the pokemon should be lynched. scorri is in fact currently voting a pokemon because she believes they are an anti-town faction. scorri does not like this representation of her actions.
comments in bold.
pokemonplayer101
New Member
After catching up on the thread, I do believe that I made a mistake there. At the time, waynegg did deserve votes. I apologize for that.
On the topic of waynegg, I'm not quite sure what to think of him as of right now. Waynegg truly could have been trying to pull the gambit, but he could've been using it as a cover-up story. Same situation as Vablakes, though carried out two very different ways. I'd like to believe that Waynegg is town due to his experience with the game, but, mainly, I think that's just my head trying to make me give into vet-reverence. :/
All I can say is that I'm keeping my eye on you, waynegg.
FoS: Waynegg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Folks, I'd like everyone to get a good look at PMysterious.
Here is all of his posts so far in the game (and, fyi, the actual in-game posts of his start on December 1st): http://pokegym.net/forums/search.php?searchid=3529675
The majority of them are either posts that are pushing for a lynch (way too much), him stating that absolutely no one can sway his opinion, or him whining about not being paid attention to.
Here's your attention, PM.
I would really like some contribution from him, as, in my opinion, he's looking quite scummy.
Two golden posts of his are:
For right now, I'll
VOTE: Pmysterious
Also, @MOD: I'd like to request prods for the following players:
Chanman
Benson
Innocent_Shine
Jason
Levity
dave628
Your Face
Pokemonrocks777
And, in case you didn't see, @moo2 has requested a replacement when possible.
DarthPika
New Member
Sorry for the lack of posting, have been distracted with Christmas/family activities (I'm only get to be home for like a week before I go back to school). I'll try to catch up and post tomorrow, since we've had some rather interesting developments. Gut feeling right now, Waynegg isn't a wolf. Not sure if he's town, but I'm not getting a scum vibe from him at the moment.
pokemonfreak5
New Member
Comments in bold.
It comes to this waynegg. If we are to believe your claim of acting scum as a gambit, what about my actions towards you deserves a scum read?
pokemonrocks777
Front Page News Editor
thunderjolt
New Member
^^He is asking pikamaster to ask those who post less to post more. (Prodding them).
Also, I'll be at cities marathon for the next week.....so not too much posting from me.
Waynegg.....that gambit did not convince me at all. I'll keep my vote on you.
Also, I'll be at cities marathon for the next week.....so not too much posting from me.
Waynegg.....that gambit did not convince me at all. I'll keep my vote on you.
If I put how my Christmas went into the plainest language possible, I'd be banned. I'll try not to let that leak in here, but I am in no mood to harvest replies out of quote tags, or trim quotes. I hope things are better tomorrow.
No, I'm not quoting this, read it yourselves. Of the five reasons you mentioned, getting on Crimsonsky's case due to the first one is something I disagree with. His connection is really bad IRL. I bring this up because I know the majority of you haven't played a game with him. I have no issues with the next three points, and the last point isn't something I'm worried about - as the game goes on, we'll have a better idea of what side he's on through process of elimination.
If you're so certain that the seer has inspected you and that you are clear, then why bother with the content of the last two paragraphs? They come across as snippy, and if you really are town, you should have no need of that.
You're kidding, right? Playing intentionally scummy is extremely detrimental to the town, ESPECIALLY if you happen to know who the seer is. Now you'll have to bank on the fact that everyone else will believe you so said seer won't have to out himself/herself to get the lynch off of you. I also disagree that the last day phase was a waste - thanks to that, I have a nice list of people who I felt were bad lynch targets.
Remember who else pulled this nonsense? I wasn't amused by that guy's antics D1, and I am extremely unhappy with how you've conducted yourself now.
Fair enough. I'm not a fan of scumhunting by flavor, though.
No nested quotes, and this irritates me greatly. Fair enough on the first three points. However, if you want all non-town lynched, then I don't see why it matters whether the Pokemon or Enforcers look worse. That's what was rubbing me wrong.
Speaking of prods, can one be sent to Shinori? I KNOW he'll be around in the next few days. LEX, if you're reading this, can you poke him over IRC?
I've gotten what I want out of my original vote. However, I'm in no emotional state to put a vote down right now. I hope I'm calmer tomorrow.
Unvote TheKing
No, I'm not quoting this, read it yourselves. Of the five reasons you mentioned, getting on Crimsonsky's case due to the first one is something I disagree with. His connection is really bad IRL. I bring this up because I know the majority of you haven't played a game with him. I have no issues with the next three points, and the last point isn't something I'm worried about - as the game goes on, we'll have a better idea of what side he's on through process of elimination.
954
I value your opinion, but I don't believe I am using it wrong. If, however, you have concrete proof of DC725's innocence I'll be willing to listen. Thanks for the bump though
I forgot to add this earlier. It's the difference between what I've done and what a bandwagon is:
What I have done is lay out evidence as I see it and left it for others to make up their own minds as to the validity of what I see. That's not a bandwagon, or even an attempt at one.
What DC725 has done is lay out evidence as he sees it and then worked very hard at coercing others to see the same. That's a bandwagon and if you fall for it, I hope it's a learning experience for your next game.
At the end of the day, my win condition is town wins. Lynch me and put the wolves that much closer to thei win condition. I'm positive I was seered in the night phase (because *someone* paraphrased my role...nope *someone* I didn't miss that). Whether they are town or not is another story. Though I won't reveal my role, I will out the seer if it gets down to crunch time and it looks like I need to.
If you're so certain that the seer has inspected you and that you are clear, then why bother with the content of the last two paragraphs? They come across as snippy, and if you really are town, you should have no need of that.
You're kidding, right? Playing intentionally scummy is extremely detrimental to the town, ESPECIALLY if you happen to know who the seer is. Now you'll have to bank on the fact that everyone else will believe you so said seer won't have to out himself/herself to get the lynch off of you. I also disagree that the last day phase was a waste - thanks to that, I have a nice list of people who I felt were bad lynch targets.
Remember who else pulled this nonsense? I wasn't amused by that guy's antics D1, and I am extremely unhappy with how you've conducted yourself now.
Fair enough. I'm not a fan of scumhunting by flavor, though.
No nested quotes, and this irritates me greatly. Fair enough on the first three points. However, if you want all non-town lynched, then I don't see why it matters whether the Pokemon or Enforcers look worse. That's what was rubbing me wrong.
Speaking of prods, can one be sent to Shinori? I KNOW he'll be around in the next few days. LEX, if you're reading this, can you poke him over IRC?
I've gotten what I want out of my original vote. However, I'm in no emotional state to put a vote down right now. I hope I'm calmer tomorrow.
Unvote TheKing
Sandslash7
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=
Waynegg ~ I don't like this gambit. It matters not to me that you have used it before.
What matters to me is the pattern. Both you and Vablakes have used this gambit of acting scummy to draw attention to yourself and then try to pull a scum out of your wagon. (Vablakes did not die Day 1, so cannot analyze his roleflip to see if he was telling the truth or not with his gambit).
First off. One should not act scummy to find scum. The only ones who should and must act scummy are scum themselves, because it is in their nature. If we allow townies to act scummy, then we allow the scum themselves the same breathing room, limiting our avenues of attack.
What you two have done is enabled scum players to "pull off this 'gambit'" if they are under pressure. Effectively they can say "well I'm just pulling the bad townie ploy, acting scummy to get a reaction and find wolves." This is bad, as you two are providing a defense for any scum player later in the game to use.
Second. You posted your reads from your wagon, but you don't have enough of a read to justify voting for someone? Surely you should have waited to reveal your strategy until you found a scum player on your wagon. This post gives 1 slight scum (JQ), 1 slight wolf (PF5), 1 slight town (Benzo), 1 town (TJ) and 4 null reads.
Waynegg. To summarize. Your gambit has failed. You have not voted for anyone, which shows you don't feel you have enough evidence from your gambit to make a voting call (or are waiting for someone to jump on JQ [like Benzo] or PF5). You got 50% null reads, which is useless to the town and to yourself. You are trying to utilize a failed tactic from D1, and it has also failed. You are allowing scum the possibility to use this, As HD/Diaz said well in the second line, tactic later on as a defense in the game (or now for that matter).
Your play is scummy and anti-town.
VOTE: WAYNEGG
What matters to me is the pattern. Both you and Vablakes have used this gambit of acting scummy to draw attention to yourself and then try to pull a scum out of your wagon. (Vablakes did not die Day 1, so cannot analyze his roleflip to see if he was telling the truth or not with his gambit).
First off. One should not act scummy to find scum. The only ones who should and must act scummy are scum themselves, because it is in their nature. If we allow townies to act scummy, then we allow the scum themselves the same breathing room, limiting our avenues of attack.
What you two have done is enabled scum players to "pull off this 'gambit'" if they are under pressure. Effectively they can say "well I'm just pulling the bad townie ploy, acting scummy to get a reaction and find wolves." This is bad, as you two are providing a defense for any scum player later in the game to use.
Second. You posted your reads from your wagon, but you don't have enough of a read to justify voting for someone? Surely you should have waited to reveal your strategy until you found a scum player on your wagon. This post gives 1 slight scum (JQ), 1 slight wolf (PF5), 1 slight town (Benzo), 1 town (TJ) and 4 null reads.
- Why do you have a "slight wolf" and a "slight scum" read? Do you think it is more likely for PF5 to be a member of the wolf faction than JQ? Do you think that JQ is less scummy than PF5?
- Why are there two different denotations for scum? Why "Wolf" and "Scum?" This is a clear example of two different writing styles, using different terms to mean the same thing, especially when writing up a very important post in your defense (coaching?).
- You have no strong leads at all. You have no player either through your gambit, or outside of it, that you feel is exceptionally scummy, or scummy enough to vote for. This is also a classic sign of scum. See WW XV where I asked the same of Gallade and DC725. They had no "strong read" on the remaining Sith/Wolf, and thus were given away by it. (See me in XVI D2 for another example) If you haven't garnered a strong read through your gambit, it failed at best and harmed the town at worst.
Waynegg. To summarize. Your gambit has failed. You have not voted for anyone, which shows you don't feel you have enough evidence from your gambit to make a voting call (or are waiting for someone to jump on JQ [like Benzo] or PF5). You got 50% null reads, which is useless to the town and to yourself. You are trying to utilize a failed tactic from D1, and it has also failed. You are allowing scum the possibility to use this, As HD/Diaz said well in the second line, tactic later on as a defense in the game (or now for that matter).
Your play is scummy and anti-town.
VOTE: WAYNEGG
Pikamaster
Active Member
VOTE COUNT:
41 Remaining
21 to lynch
Waynegg- 8 (Pokemonfreak5, Dragonclyne725, Glaceon, Human Destroyer, Thunderjolt, JewelQuest, Diaz, Sandslash7)
Vablakes- 6 (Scorri, StrongRhino, Jpulice, DarthPika, SMP88, Pikajewel)
Shinori- 1 (Crimsonsky)
Crimsonsky- 1 (Prohawk)
Dragonclyne725- 2 (G landers, TheKing)
JewelQuest- 1 (Benzo)
PMysterious- 1 (Pokemonplayer101)
41 Remaining
21 to lynch
Waynegg- 8 (Pokemonfreak5, Dragonclyne725, Glaceon, Human Destroyer, Thunderjolt, JewelQuest, Diaz, Sandslash7)
Vablakes- 6 (Scorri, StrongRhino, Jpulice, DarthPika, SMP88, Pikajewel)
Shinori- 1 (Crimsonsky)
Crimsonsky- 1 (Prohawk)
Dragonclyne725- 2 (G landers, TheKing)
JewelQuest- 1 (Benzo)
PMysterious- 1 (Pokemonplayer101)
Re post#980: Benzo, where are you getting the idea that Ditto is in the game? I will agree with you on the idea of possible janitor role.
To further clarify my positioning, I prefer to completely eliminate the wolves faction before going after the other factions because they are the only faction with a clearly define ability to kill at night. While it looks like there is another faction that has a killing role besides the wolves, there is no way as of right now to definitively prove either Enforcer or Pokemon faction has kill role. The wolves are clearly an immediate threat that needs to be eliminated;
To those that wants to target someone for being outed as a Pokemon: Let's say you are in the battlefield. You have someone, wolf, who is holding a knife to the side of your neck, close to your carotid artery. Somewhere 600 yards away from you is a sniper who has just shot at you; in this analogy the sniper is either Enforcer or Pokemon. So you guys would rather target the sniper than someone holding a knife to your neck. Is that right?
Waynegg: That is one brazen ploy. Of the two scum-like ploys use so far, Vablakes is by far the scummiest of all. I am going have to go back to see the responses both ploys received to see if there is any similarities.
To further clarify my positioning, I prefer to completely eliminate the wolves faction before going after the other factions because they are the only faction with a clearly define ability to kill at night. While it looks like there is another faction that has a killing role besides the wolves, there is no way as of right now to definitively prove either Enforcer or Pokemon faction has kill role. The wolves are clearly an immediate threat that needs to be eliminated;
To those that wants to target someone for being outed as a Pokemon: Let's say you are in the battlefield. You have someone, wolf, who is holding a knife to the side of your neck, close to your carotid artery. Somewhere 600 yards away from you is a sniper who has just shot at you; in this analogy the sniper is either Enforcer or Pokemon. So you guys would rather target the sniper than someone holding a knife to your neck. Is that right?
Waynegg: That is one brazen ploy. Of the two scum-like ploys use so far, Vablakes is by far the scummiest of all. I am going have to go back to see the responses both ploys received to see if there is any similarities.
waynegg
CotD Editor<br>Forum Moderator
@ SS7
What does it matter whether you personally like or dislike a particular strategic play? All that should matter is the results from that play. VABlakes said he was trying to use this ploy D1, but he didn't exactly pull it off did he? He chickened out the moment he had the slightest amount of pressure on him (4 votes iirc) and no info was gained for the town.
I did it the right way, got a viable list which included some clear voting irregularities, and then let my play be known. I stick my neck out there to provide some focused discussion and instead of working with what I provided you (and others) berate me over not liking the play. What have you done to further the town's interest? Nothing- aside from random accusations with the feeblest of evidence to back those accusations.
You know, before this I thought you were a good player. This reads like "Look everyone, he used two words that mean the exact same thing. He must be scum!". What? No wonder the wolves won the last game. Did it ever cross your mind that I possibly took what I learned in English class to heart- vary your pronouns when you write so it isn't redundant. I'm extremely disappointed that a so-called vet would grasp at such fine straws and cast a reactionary vote...
My "gambit" (hate that term, but whatever) didn't fail. It accomplished exactly what it was supposed to accomplish. If there is any fail here, it's on the part of you guys who haven't even attempted to use the information I've provided you.
@ all who have asked or wondered
Yesterday was Christmas. I, like hopefully all the rest of you, had plans. I typed up my analysis of those who voted for me separately on TextEdit (mac). When you copy/paste from TextEdit to here, it undoes any formatting you may have done (gotta bold your vote or it doesn't count) so I planned on adding my vote after pasting. I pm'd a few people who were online at that late hour for a bump and none responded with the kindness, so I went to bed. The next morning, with my wife over my shoulder (Hurry!... We gotta go!... We're running late!... blah, blah, blah) I rushed and forgot to add the vote before flying out the door to go visit family.
By the time I realized I hadn't added my vote (when Benzo pointed it out) it was well too late to do so and not look bad for it.
VOTE: JewelQuest
What does it matter whether you personally like or dislike a particular strategic play? All that should matter is the results from that play. VABlakes said he was trying to use this ploy D1, but he didn't exactly pull it off did he? He chickened out the moment he had the slightest amount of pressure on him (4 votes iirc) and no info was gained for the town.
I did it the right way, got a viable list which included some clear voting irregularities, and then let my play be known. I stick my neck out there to provide some focused discussion and instead of working with what I provided you (and others) berate me over not liking the play. What have you done to further the town's interest? Nothing- aside from random accusations with the feeblest of evidence to back those accusations.
You know, before this I thought you were a good player. This reads like "Look everyone, he used two words that mean the exact same thing. He must be scum!". What? No wonder the wolves won the last game. Did it ever cross your mind that I possibly took what I learned in English class to heart- vary your pronouns when you write so it isn't redundant. I'm extremely disappointed that a so-called vet would grasp at such fine straws and cast a reactionary vote...
My "gambit" (hate that term, but whatever) didn't fail. It accomplished exactly what it was supposed to accomplish. If there is any fail here, it's on the part of you guys who haven't even attempted to use the information I've provided you.
@ all who have asked or wondered
Yesterday was Christmas. I, like hopefully all the rest of you, had plans. I typed up my analysis of those who voted for me separately on TextEdit (mac). When you copy/paste from TextEdit to here, it undoes any formatting you may have done (gotta bold your vote or it doesn't count) so I planned on adding my vote after pasting. I pm'd a few people who were online at that late hour for a bump and none responded with the kindness, so I went to bed. The next morning, with my wife over my shoulder (Hurry!... We gotta go!... We're running late!... blah, blah, blah) I rushed and forgot to add the vote before flying out the door to go visit family.
By the time I realized I hadn't added my vote (when Benzo pointed it out) it was well too late to do so and not look bad for it.
VOTE: JewelQuest
I am using the information you provided me, even if it wasn't the "results" of your gambit. The information is on your play.
What I suspect happened:
You started making mistakes when team mates caught you and told you to stop. You excuse was saying you used the same gambit Vablakes did, and you chose it because he made wasn't lynched.
You didn't vote until you the flaw of your "gambit" was pointed out. It lead to nothing. So you voted so it would look like it worked. (I understand you forgot to vote on an earlier post, but unless this post was 50+ posts ago and you have been conveniently forgetting, it doesn't matter.) My read on JQ would be leaning town honestly.
waynegg
CotD Editor<br>Forum Moderator
You're quoting part of my antics to draw votes to me. You realize that, right? And, not needed? The threat to reveal the seer was very much needed. That threat was my proof that what I was doing was a PLOY. Nobody could reasonably know who the seer is after just one game day. One smart player picked up on that:
Sandslash7
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showpost.php?p=
Read the bold please.
I'm surprised at your response to my post. You immediately attack my "vet" status, rather than actually dealing with my points. The underlined text has no place in this game nor any game. Intimated ad-hominems and other attacks on my person, as well as brash assumptions about games that you were not a part of have no place here.
My responses:
1) You realize that I moderated XVII C, correct? You can't attack my play for a game I did not play.
2) You are grossly oversimplifying my point to a strawman. I agree that variation between verbiage is good. I do the same when writing. But that specific kind of change is suspect in Werewolf. Clarity trumps variation. You are not writing a novel here. Especially when this game's setup is extremely complicated and those types of details are important.
3) With WW grasping at fine straws is sometimes necessary to find well-hidden scum.
4) This is not a reactionary vote. If you would have bothered to read my post you'll see that this is not a snap/reactionary/omgus vote.
5) You ignored all of my points, which I'm repeating/expanding below.
1) You are allowing scum the ability to use this gambit as a defense later in the game.
2) As scum, this would be a proven defense/gambit to use, as Vablakes has survived so far after using it.
3) When I posted, you had 4 "slight" reads and 4 nulls, only one of which you were barely pushing with a whisper of conviction. (PF5)
4) Post 970, 973, 975, and 977 all went by before you realized that you had failed to post your vote. If you truly had a strong read it seems logical that you'd make sure that you said that, either in text or with your vote. But you did none of this until after I called you on it. Unsurprisingly after guessing that you'd go for JQ. While I am understanding for IRL circumstances, a vote that you feel strongly about is not something that can be forgotten (especially if you reread your post once).
5) You attack my person, as well as set up a strawman of my argument, rather than actually resolving any of my points.
6) You finally make a vote, but only after someone else leads the way to a player you had already highlighted before hand.
7) Your vote comes not for the player that you most highlight in your analysis post (PF5), but a player someone already voted for, one that you fail to mention at all in the intervening time until you vote for her (JQ).
8) You have failed to answer my questions about whether you believe PF5 or JQ to be more scummy (minus your vote, which given the percentage of your text which mentions PF5 versus JQ seems to be counter-intuitive), or whether you feel that PF5 is more likely to be a wolf versus generic scum.
9) Your reasons for voting for JQ are non-existent in your vote post. Why are you voting for JQ?
10) If I were to back-trace your reasons for voting for JQ, they would be: "hasn't really contributed, has posted twice this game day, seems to lurk quite a bit." Hardly a convincing argument that was garnered from your gambit. The only other reason I can see for voting JQ is that Benzo already has voted for her, and you are seeking to build a bandwagon without starting it.
As I said before. Your gambit failed.
waynegg
CotD Editor<br>Forum Moderator
Read son- read! I already explained this:
Nice and convenient you left out the most important part, and what influenced my vote the most for JQ- pop-in voting and using others' reasoning as her reasoning. That's as CLASSIC A WOLF TELL as you can get. The fact that I wrote out more stuff on pokemonfreak5 is really beside the point in the face of that. It's all about quality of evidence for my vote, not quantity.
And as I said before, it accomplished exactly what it was supposed to. It provides a credible list of suspects that more than likely contains one or more wolves. Whether it ultimately fails or not will depend on whether others fall for your distractionary techniques of keeping the focus on me instead of on what I risked being voted out for, not just because you say so.
In attacking me right now, you're painting yourself into a hole. If I'm lynched, I will flip town. Then people will see your beating of a dead horse as particularly scummy and you will be high up on everybody's radar. Are you really ready to be tomorrow's lynch?
Human Destroyer
New Member
Hello classic scum tactic. (Emphasis is mine)
I'd actually say you're digging your own grave. Appeal to fear is such a common scum tactic (yes I've started reading games on MS), and pretty much everyone who does it is scum.
I also disagree with the second-to-last sentence. I wouldn't put SS7 high up on my scum radar even if you did flip town (which I find to be unlikely at this point), as your actions are pretty clearly scummy.
DragonClyne725
New Member
We have less than 2 days remaining, let's try not to miss this one like we did Day 1.
Anyway, I hold my vote for waynegg as I do not believe this "gambit" he claims to have been playing. As several people have stated, it seems to me as if he's just trying to cover up his acting scummy by using the same excuse Vablakes used and got away with, which I do not like at all. Also, I am not liking the fact that he has resorted to flat out threatening to scare people away from his lynch.
Anyway, I hold my vote for waynegg as I do not believe this "gambit" he claims to have been playing. As several people have stated, it seems to me as if he's just trying to cover up his acting scummy by using the same excuse Vablakes used and got away with, which I do not like at all. Also, I am not liking the fact that he has resorted to flat out threatening to scare people away from his lynch.
waynegg
CotD Editor<br>Forum Moderator
Rah! Rah! Hurry and lynch Wayne! Nice!
It's obvious I'm not going to convince you or a few others, but I can at least appeal to the common sense of everyone else.
Let me again point out the difference between D2 waynegg gambit from D1 Vablakes gambit:
- On Day 1 the play lasted all of 3 hours and 41 minutes before he got cold feet (or perhaps overeager) and caved on his strategy. He gained all of 3 votes in that time (I just went back and double checked so I didn't have to "iirc"). You can see it yourself between post 305 and post 317. For that gambit to work, you gotta let the votes role in and every now and then give a prod so some clump voting can happen that you can pull suspects from.
- On day 2 I began setting up the play on my first post. The real heat lasted for about 2 pages. In that time, I raised 8 votes for myself (more than a third of what is needed to lynch) with 2 areas of clump voting. Even pulled a follow up vote or two which could be referred back to if needed for later in the game. I still have a couple who appear to be going to any length to get me lynched.
- Clump voting lets scum feel comfortable to slide their vote in on the cool.
- Leaves a viable list from which to pick and question suspects based on voting/participation irregularities
- Keeps the town from random voting out town roles based on nothing more than things such as not liking a particular person's play style or 'tone' to their text
- Leaves an after list of scum players who are actively pushing for the lynch on the townie who played the gambit, after all, 2 town kills in a day serve the scum best
I literally lol'd when I read this:
Scum have to act scummy and town can act only friendly. My foot! If this game were that simple nobody would care to play it. The game would be too easy and end after very few phases. This coming from a game mod is quite interesting in itself. Maybe SS7 is following his own made up rules. Hmm...
Then there's the pure risk of the gambit itself. The player who runs the gambit sticks their neck out to help the town, literally. If they can't rein it back in, they stand the very real chance of being lynched. What good, experienced player would do that if they had a wolf role? Right after someone did such a horrible job with it just the phase before? Provide the town with a voting list that is sure to contain at least 1, if not more, wolves and take the chance of being lynched themselves? I'll tell ya. None. It makes no sense as it would be extremely detrimental to a team which is already in the minority.
And then there's my rhetoric itself. There is a very noticeable difference in the tone of my posts now as opposed to the first half of the day. Why would that be, other than the fact that I was truly running that gambit over? I could have easily taken this tone from the start of the day and avoided all of this by just mulling along and hoping someone was flushed out. And we still wouldn't have anything more than unfounded accusations to go off.
As DragonClyne pointed out, we only have 2 days left. How about we systematically question the viable suspects and see if the town can't find an actual wolf. If we don't, then we'll waste another day and give up two or more townspeople in the process.