(11-08-2025, 12:24 PM)Amy the Singer Wrote: Have read back and ISOd everyone. From my notes, Lily and Ray are suspicious. Both of them emphasise the peeking good wolf, which tbh is almost standard in most games these days so not really worth noting. It's mostly tone reading for me - neither come across as sincere, it feels forced.

That said, my notes on others are largely 'unsure' because it's D1 and there's the usual amount of nothing to go on.

(11-08-2025, 01:36 PM)Amy the Singer Wrote: @Gordon the Cook

I agree with you on FFAs and vote declarations. Time and 2 names should cover it.
FFAs should come with reasons and not just names too.

(11-08-2025, 01:49 PM)Amy the Singer Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 01:44 PM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: Explain this. Why give a time and two names? If someone is declaring a vote then they should be honest and not obfuscate. Two votes to me is just giving cover to wolves to change their vote. Or do you mean only two names in a FFA, and if so, why only two? 
I'm genuinely mot understanding the reasoning behind this post.

It was in response to Gordon's suggestion about how to declare votes without declaring votes to prevent a Cruella kill via tie. I liked the suggestion but am not married to it. I cant see the wolves orchestrating a tie but I can see them taking advantage of one that develops naturally.

(11-08-2025, 03:20 PM)Amy the Singer Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 03:10 PM)Boris the Fool Wrote: Can you share a few of the notes from your ISO? Like you say you've ISO'd everyone & then just say Lilly & Ray are suspicious for those reasons

Give your read on me for example? Or anyone else.. I get it's D1 & all but would be interested to hear it

Am away from my computer so dont have my full notes handy but be back home in an hour and can give full details then. 
My read on you was a bit spatty but not afraid to challenge and engaging with thread a lot. On Oprah I noted that I didn't really see what others were seeing in terms of sowing confusion but they were fixated on Cruella which they acknowledged themselves.

(11-08-2025, 05:48 PM)Amy the Singer Wrote: Heading out in a few. Notes below.

Boris the Fool Bit spatty.Contributing. Sort of agree on the OTT thing. Engaged and challening people. Wouldn't vote here for now.

Countess Markievicz Measured. Unsure here. Not a lot of posts throughout the day. Doesn't feel like village game but they've been v quiet.

Dexter the Dragoon High poster. If wolf, Hans. Likely to draw munch or be peeked. Bit all over the place which makes me think village.

Dora the Explorer 1 Post but has done the maths. ISOd Friar Tuck. Why them? More posts today. Analysing with conclusions. If wolf, doing a lot of work. Not sure I agree on Dex but working. I'm on FFA but currently reading through my posts - cart before horse? 

Friar Tuck Dora doesn't like posts but not seeing a lot here. Very low posting. Be good to hear more.

Gordon the Cook Mostly leaning good here. Observant and engaged. Putting thoughts out there.

Jacob the Tailor Exactly 5 posts yesterday. Tone reading - seems a bit stating the obvious. Bit off. Also says Oprah sowing confusion. Is this not echoing what Dex said?  Collusion in BR?

Lilly the Millennial Unsure of opening post. Something a bit off there tonewise. Post about post counts. Spotted thing on powers thief. Quotes without names thing. Shoot @McD, peek @Dex. Quite defensive in responses today. Can't shake the tone being off.

McDonald the Farmer What's with the powers thief? I read it as apprentice. Seems to be just reading and reacting. Aggressive enough. Not sure about the just 2 on FFA thing. Overall neutral to village for me.

Moe the Innkeeper 1 Post but experienced enough. Limited posts today. Hard to get a read but asking questions and gave reads on readback. Again would like to hear more.

Oprah the Gossip Are they sowing confusion? Not sure I agree with that read. The are 'tunnelling' on Cruella - easy place to boost post counts. Defensive enough. One to watch.

Raymond the Shoemaker Paying attention, corrected Dex. Unfinished post? Says something v similar to Lily about wolf peeking good. Suggests discussions around vote tallying are OTT. Not against discussion but manner of it. Questions McD on Jacob veto. Definitely aware of what's happening but posts today read better tonewise.

(11-08-2025, 05:49 PM)Amy the Singer Wrote: Based on my notes my #FFA:

Lily
Jacob
Countess M

I'm going to put my vote in for Lily.

(11-08-2025, 05:52 PM)Amy the Singer Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 05:50 PM)Jacob the Tailor Wrote: Im curious, why me second?

It's a tone reading thing. Feels like forced sincerity. Largely gut and vote hasn't gone for you.

(11-08-2025, 07:31 PM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 07:22 PM)Dora the Explorer Wrote: @Raymond the Shoemaker  After saying all the above, I am currently voting for Amy, I dont have a problem with your direction of vote, more so how you got there

I was speed reading lunch time on mobile (while eating). With all the multi quotes I got confused and thought Amy did the ISOs on Lilly and I, followed by saying we are most suspicious based on her ISOs. Then Dexter pointed out that Amy hadn't done the ISOs, so what I thought was someone doing due diligence and coming to a conclusion, seemed less so, and more like copying someone else's homework.
Then I really didn't like the jumping on the two votes plan as it is not helpful to village. Then Boris I think questioned Amy regarding her ISO as she just said she did one but hadn't posted it. She said she would be home in an hour to post it, which would be approx half four. But when I questioned over an hour after that she was taking notes.
So what initially seemed to me someone trying to figure things out seemed more like someone just coming up with a FFA for the sake of it.

(11-08-2025, 04:46 PM)Oprah the Gossip Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 04:42 PM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: You were the one who brought that up first 🤷‍♂️


Parroting other people's posts again, do you do tricks? Or even have any thoughts for yourself.

Others could be parrotting me , I am tunnelling on limitless Cruella just let me dig away

(11-08-2025, 04:47 PM)Oprah the Gossip Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 04:32 PM)Jacob the Tailor Wrote: Who would you protect?

I would protect Lily

(11-08-2025, 04:52 PM)Oprah the Gossip Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 04:28 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote: General vibe I'm getting is that people want to stick to the usual gameplan - do FFAs and full Vote Declaration?

If anyone majorly disagrees with this, please shout.

I'll try to tally a consensus and post when I can, or if anyone else has some time, please feel free.

I am happy with FFA and vote declaration

(11-08-2025, 05:25 PM)Oprah the Gossip Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 05:09 PM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: #FFA1

Oprah - think it's well documented why Opie is on my FFA
Raymond- they had typically passed under the radar with no posts yesterday and the posts today where only highlighted really when Mac brought them up, they haven't contributed much at all and mainly filler/fluff posts
Countess M - again has offered the sweet some of feck all with their one liners, asked a few questions around how the site worked after earlier throwing shade at me for explaining how something on this site worked. Posts amount to nothing at all and not helpful whatsoever to the village. Id miss their excel sheets if they went, that's about it..

Posting this now as I've to go spend some time with the kids 😂 won't be back till after they are asleep which is usually sometimes after 8.. I'll try to keep reading along and if something changes I'll update

I do not like others jumping on me because of Dexter, fair enough he started his reason on me but now I feel others are taking the easy way out and sticking their votes on me which is why Jacob and Friar Tuck are going on my FFA

(11-08-2025, 06:57 PM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: Countess M is going up my list tbh, they are not helping the village whatsoever, they "don't do" FFA's, their vote is just going on someone because that person was suspicious of them. Offering no insight really at all..

I'm on Oprah don't think I'll be moving unless absolutely required, but that's the other person I would prefer to vote for if needs be.

(10-08-2025, 06:41 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote: Just blitzed through the thread there and while it never really occurred to me that it could be a possibility before, i kinda like the idea of keeping votes secret so wolves can't manipulate an extra kill out of us!

Saying that, I haven't thought it through at all, so I'm sure some more experienced heads will have strong input on it..

(11-08-2025, 07:03 PM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 06:41 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote: Can you share where I contradicted myself? Fairly sure my stance has been pretty consistent.

Yes, as I said earlier in the day you were putting it out there that maybe we should do the on thread vote tallying to avoid a tie situation were the Cruella condition could activate. I know you were not 100% advocating it, but wondering whether worth it as a strategy. But then later you went to the idea that we all declare two possible votes and a time, which means no one has any idea whether a tie could happen or not as we have no definitive voting information.

That to me is completely contradictory because you went from wondering whether to adopt a strategy to avoid a tie situation at the possible cost of giving wolves voting info to a situation were there is no concrete voting info for anyone, hence greater chance of the Cruella condition being fulfilled.

(11-08-2025, 08:02 PM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote: 1 hour to go, do we have a clear lead at the moment? is anybody keeping track?
If there is a clear leader, we should probably consolidate there instead of risking a tie.

(11-08-2025, 08:09 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 08:02 PM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote: 1 hour to go, do we have a clear lead at the moment? is anybody keeping track?
If there is a clear leader, we should probably consolidate there instead of risking a tie.

If everyone jumps on one person then we get no useful data about the lynch wagons....

(11-08-2025, 08:01 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote:

(10-08-2025, 06:41 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote: Just blitzed through the thread there and while it never really occurred to me that it could be a possibility before, i kinda like the idea of keeping votes secret so wolves can't manipulate an extra kill out of us!

Saying that, I haven't thought it through at all, so I'm sure some more experienced heads will have strong input on it..

My vote is going on Ray now. 

He's deliberately lying about me contradicting myself. And won't provide the post numbers or quotes. 

This is my first post talking about votes. I've consistently said I'm concerned about a full tally helping wolves, but would follow consensus. Nowhere did I try to push for full transparency on votes, but when village consensus was clear I said I'd step in like. 

I've only 26 posts so it wouldn't be that hard to ISO me. 

I said early on that Ray felt off, it hasn't changed and only got stronger with this. 

Vote confirmed at 8:00

(11-08-2025, 08:13 PM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 08:09 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote: If everyone jumps on one person then we get no useful data about the lynch wagons....

What is more important? lynching our choice, or the data? As if we tie, we don't even get to choose the lynch target.

(11-08-2025, 08:08 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 07:03 PM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: Yes, as I said earlier in the day you were putting it out there that maybe we should do the on thread vote tallying to avoid a tie situation were the Cruella condition could activate. I know you were not 100% advocating it, but wondering whether worth it as a strategy. But then later you went to the idea that we all declare two possible votes and a time, which means no one has any idea whether a tie could happen or not as we have no definitive voting information.

That to me is completely contradictory because you went from wondering whether to adopt a strategy to avoid a tie situation at the possible cost of giving wolves voting info to a situation were there is no concrete voting info for anyone, hence greater chance of the Cruella condition being fulfilled.

People need to read this carefully. It's the biggest load of doublespeak I've ever read. 

I never suggested full tally. I always wanted to have some buffer so wolves couldn't manipulate as easy. 

People didn't like the idea of secrecy which I understood so I tried to come up with an option I thought would be a compromise of both, giving us reasonable but not perfect data while also protecting us from giving wolves too much info. 

The fact people didn't think it was a good idea has no bearing on me being good or bad, moreso that I'm just not a good strategic thinker obviously. 

You jumping on it with falsehoods when it's all out there clear for the reading is a major red flag.

(11-08-2025, 08:25 PM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 08:08 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote: People need to read this carefully. It's the biggest load of doublespeak I've ever read. 

I never suggested full tally. I always wanted to have some buffer so wolves couldn't manipulate as easy. 

People didn't like the idea of secrecy which I understood so I tried to come up with an option I thought would be a compromise of both, giving us reasonable but not perfect data while also protecting us from giving wolves too much info. 

The fact people didn't think it was a good idea has no bearing on me being good or bad, moreso that I'm just not a good strategic thinker obviously. 

You jumping on it with falsehoods when it's all out there clear for the reading is a major red flag.

For what it's worth I have you as village lean.

(11-08-2025, 08:31 PM)Gordon the Cook Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 08:25 PM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: For what it's worth I have you as village lean.

Good to know. What's the rest of your list look like? 

Tell me why I'm wrong for voting for you?

(11-08-2025, 08:22 PM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: Has everyone declared? That's the other thing if not everyone has declared it might be hard to hedge bets by moving. I voted for Amy. Would move to Oprah if necessary, they are not terribly helpful to teh village.

(11-08-2025, 08:33 PM)Vincent the Artist Wrote: I haven't declared yet. I'm voting Oprah who I believe introduced the idea of multiple lynch Cruella in the event of a tie and in later posts distanced themselves from that.

(11-08-2025, 08:41 PM)Oprah the Gossip Wrote: Sorry I could only get on now but ye are wasting the lynch on me, we need village numbers, has everyone jumped on Dexter's bandwagon for me?

I am not the only one who has talked about limitless Cruella

I am voting Friar Tuck once he is on my lynch form

(11-08-2025, 08:41 PM)Jacob the Tailor Wrote: Amy - Moe, McDonald Farmer, Raymond
Oprah - Boris, Jacob, Lilly, Vincent
Ray - Gordon
Lily - Amy

Undeclared - Countess

(11-08-2025, 08:41 PM)Oprah the Gossip Wrote: Sorry I could only get on now but ye are wasting the lynch on me, we need village numbers, has everyone jumped on Dexter's bandwagon for me?

I am not the only one who has talked about limitless Cruella

I am voting Friar Tuck once he is on my lynch form

(11-08-2025, 08:34 PM)Lilly the Millennial Wrote: I voted @Oprah the Gossip at 20:30

(11-08-2025, 08:44 PM)Jacob the Tailor Wrote: Amy - Moe, McDonald Farmer, Raymond
Oprah - Boris, Jacob, Lilly, Vincent, Dexter (according to Boris)
Ray - Gordon
Lily - Amy

Undeclared - Countess, Oprah,

Lads we can't leave it like this. Oprah acting dumb so she doesn't vote an self pres probably cause she's cruella

(11-08-2025, 08:46 PM)Lilly the Millennial Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 08:34 PM)Lilly the Millennial Wrote: I voted @Oprah the Gossip at 20:30

(11-08-2025, 08:44 PM)Jacob the Tailor Wrote: Amy - Moe, McDonald Farmer, Raymond
Oprah - Boris, Jacob, Lilly, Vincent, Dexter (according to Boris)
Ray - Gordon
Lily - Amy

Undeclared - Countess, Oprah,

Lads we can't leave it like this. Oprah acting dumb so she doesn't vote an self pres probably cause she's cruella

Your list is incorrect.