(12-08-2025, 08:52 AM)Amy the Singer Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:47 AM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: Gordon and Oprah are dead, only the top three wagons count, so you are included and so is she.

Yes, I know this. My point was about Lily specifically naming my wagon and not hers.

(12-08-2025, 09:03 AM)Amy the Singer Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:57 AM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: No she didn't 😂 when you include the dreaded posters, you are the only one left on the Amy wagon, so she called you a wolf. You didn't like it so you are disgarding the whole post.. even though she specifically says that there could be 2 on Oprah, one on Amy and one on Lilly, so 2 from a fuckload, 1 from 1 and 1 from 2. So instead of disregarding what she said, maybe look at the off wagon votes. and I agree with her btw, I would be looking first at the 3 posters left off Oprah, mainly because I can't see all 4 wolves voting together.

So there could be 1(or possibly 2) in Amy, you and Countess.

No, she specifically did NOT say that bit in bold. That was the point I was making.

(12-08-2025, 08:58 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:47 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: I gave a pretty detailed reason to Dora last night.
Basically reading on mobile I thought the ISOs Dexter did on me and Lilly were done by Amy as she mentioned us as most suspicious based on her ISO. 

Dexter pointed out to me that he had done the ISO not Amy, so that made it look a bit more like she had cribbed someone else's work rather than genuinely wolf hunting. 
Then she was quick to support Gordon's rubbish two named votes thing which only benefitted wolves. 

She told you she would post her ISOs, notes in an hour at half three, but then claimed way later than that she was still taking notes. 

I think her posts last night were a bit more reassuring to me, but not sure whether she's just gone in to damage limitation mode.

I dont really understand your reasoning for voting amy, it just reads as very confusing to me

Ill check back if I have time but it just seems like you got confused and used it as a reason to vote amy

Id agree amy wasn't very helpful yesterday but their posts last night were a little better so im happy to hear them out today rather than rush to vote their

(12-08-2025, 08:57 AM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:50 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: I'm not discounting wagonomics but Lily basically named everyone as possible wolf with that post. That's not helpful in narrowing the field.

No she didn't 😂 when you include the dreaded posters, you are the only one left on the Amy wagon, so she called you a wolf. You didn't like it so you are disgarding the whole post.. even though she specifically says that there could be 2 on Oprah, one on Amy and one on Lilly, so 2 from a fuckload, 1 from 1 and 1 from 2. So instead of disregarding what she said, maybe look at the off wagon votes. and I agree with her btw, I would be looking first at the 3 posters left off Oprah, mainly because I can't see all 4 wolves voting together.

So there could be 1(or possibly 2) in Amy, you and Countess.

(12-08-2025, 07:24 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 09:13 PM)Moe the Innkeeper Wrote: Jesus, I was convinced Oprah was a wolf, the game play was so off.

How did the sk spot Dora? Must read back on her posts.

Were you convinced Oprah was a wolf though? You said you were between Oprah and countess yesterday

(12-08-2025, 09:13 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:58 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote: I dont really understand your reasoning for voting amy, it just reads as very confusing to me

Ill check back if I have time but it just seems like you got confused and used it as a reason to vote amy

Id agree amy wasn't very helpful yesterday but their posts last night were a little better so im happy to hear them out today rather than rush to vote their

I voted Amy fairly early, so I'm not sure why you are saying I am confused. They claimed they had taken detailed notes at half three and would post them at half four but when I questioned them far later than that they said they were still compiling notes. I also didn't like their support for the Gordon two votes plan, which could have led to an inadvertent tie.

(12-08-2025, 09:21 AM)Moe the Innkeeper Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 07:24 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote: Were you convinced Oprah was a wolf though? You said you were between Oprah and countess yesterday

I thought she was a likely wolf because her posts were fluffy and she kept speculating about the Cruella power. She later backed away from her speculation that more than one tied player could be lynched.

What convinced me was her posts after the wagon had formed, she didn't try to convince us she wasn't a wolf, she didn't really contribute any reads of other players so didn't look like she was wolf hunting.

(12-08-2025, 09:18 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:57 AM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: No she didn't 😂 when you include the dreaded posters, you are the only one left on the Amy wagon, so she called you a wolf. You didn't like it so you are disgarding the whole post.. even though she specifically says that there could be 2 on Oprah, one on Amy and one on Lilly, so 2 from a fuckload, 1 from 1 and 1 from 2. So instead of disregarding what she said, maybe look at the off wagon votes. and I agree with her btw, I would be looking first at the 3 posters left off Oprah, mainly because I can't see all 4 wolves voting together.

So there could be 1(or possibly 2) in Amy, you and Countess.

You are reaching. Lilly just made a post saying some wolves on one wagon, one on another wagon and one off wagon which pretty much encompasses everyone, so doesn't narrow the field and provides no reasoning whatsoever for this assertion of hers. 

I don't know why anyone would give it any credence, as she has given no supporting evidence for how the wolves would be distributed.

(12-08-2025, 09:03 AM)Amy the Singer Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:57 AM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: No she didn't 😂 when you include the dreaded posters, you are the only one left on the Amy wagon, so she called you a wolf. You didn't like it so you are disgarding the whole post.. even though she specifically says that there could be 2 on Oprah, one on Amy and one on Lilly, so 2 from a fuckload, 1 from 1 and 1 from 2. So instead of disregarding what she said, maybe look at the off wagon votes. and I agree with her btw, I would be looking first at the 3 posters left off Oprah, mainly because I can't see all 4 wolves voting together.

So there could be 1(or possibly 2) in Amy, you and Countess.

No, she specifically did NOT say that bit in bold. That was the point I was making.

(12-08-2025, 09:24 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:21 AM)Moe the Innkeeper Wrote: I thought she was a likely wolf because her posts were fluffy and she kept speculating about the Cruella power. She later backed away from her speculation that more than one tied player could be lynched.

What convinced me was her posts after the wagon had formed, she didn't try to convince us she wasn't a wolf, she didn't really contribute any reads of other players so didn't look like she was wolf hunting.

Yeah id agree she was a good candidate based on her posts but I don't think id have gone so far to say i was convinced,  especially on d1 nothing is set in stone

(12-08-2025, 09:31 AM)Lilly the Millennial Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:03 AM)Amy the Singer Wrote: No, she specifically did NOT say that bit in bold. That was the point I was making.

Because at the time before the lynch, there were 2 wagons. Oprah and Amy, I wasn't a counter wagon based on the tallies by Jacob and Mc.
Wolves are known to spread across the wagons.

(12-08-2025, 08:31 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(11-08-2025, 09:22 PM)Lilly the Millennial Wrote: Time for wagonomics.
4 wolves. There will be a couple on Oprah, and possibly one on Amy, and one off wagon.

Lilly sprang into action last night after the lynch but I'm not sure how helpful any of it was. Particularly liked this gem which narrowed the wolves down to the main wagon, the other wagons and off wagon, which basically encompasses all players.

(12-08-2025, 09:31 AM)Amy the Singer Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:24 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote: Yeah id agree she was a good candidate based on her posts but I don't think id have gone so far to say i was convinced,  especially on d1 nothing is set in stone

But you voted there?

(12-08-2025, 08:57 AM)Countess Markievicz Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:26 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: @Dexter the Dragoon not much to go on with either of those, but I agree with not discounting them. What stands out the most to me is is the Vincent quote about the strike rate.

Also in the low posters is Moe, who I keep nearly forgetting about.

sup raymond

(12-08-2025, 09:24 AM)Boris the Fool Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:21 AM)Moe the Innkeeper Wrote: I thought she was a likely wolf because her posts were fluffy and she kept speculating about the Cruella power. She later backed away from her speculation that more than one tied player could be lynched.

What convinced me was her posts after the wagon had formed, she didn't try to convince us she wasn't a wolf, she didn't really contribute any reads of other players so didn't look like she was wolf hunting.

Yeah id agree she was a good candidate based on her posts but I don't think id have gone so far to say i was convinced,  especially on d1 nothing is set in stone

(12-08-2025, 09:35 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 08:57 AM)Countess Markievicz Wrote: sup raymond

Could you explain to me why you were so unbothered by Tuck's death that you failed to notice they were village?

Because I can't think of any non innocent explanation for that.

(12-08-2025, 09:52 AM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:35 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: Could you explain to me why you were so unbothered by Tuck's death that you failed to notice they were village?

Because I can't think of any non innocent explanation for that.

Then why are you questioning?

I don't understand. Why wouldn't I question why someone didn't notice what alignment a dead villager had?

(12-08-2025, 09:54 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:52 AM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote: Then why are you questioning?

I don't understand. Why wouldn't I question why someone didn't notice what alignment a dead villager had?

(12-08-2025, 09:58 AM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:54 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

Because of what you said. If you can’t see a non innocent reason, then why ask?
Are you trying to trip a villager up?

Seems like weird logic to be questioning what you can’t conscience a wolf would post

(12-08-2025, 09:58 AM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote: Because of what you said. If you can’t see a non innocent reason, then why ask?
Are you trying to trip a villager up?

Seems like weird logic to be questioning what you can’t conscience a wolf would post

(12-08-2025, 10:00 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 09:58 AM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote: Because of what you said. If you can’t see a non innocent reason, then why ask?
Are you trying to trip a villager up?

Seems like weird logic to be questioning what you can’t conscience a wolf would post

I'm questioning someone I think is a wolf or Scar. They would be the only people who wouldn't take note of Tuck's alignment.

(12-08-2025, 10:02 AM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 10:00 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: I'm questioning someone I think is a wolf or Scar. They would be the only people who wouldn't take note of Tuck's alignment.

The wolves know Ella ain’t with them, scar is loner. They are not making that mistake 😂
You said it yourself. You cant think of a non incident reason, so why ask?

(12-08-2025, 10:03 AM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote:

(12-08-2025, 10:02 AM)McDonald the Farmer Wrote: The wolves know Ella ain’t with them, scar is loner. They are not making that mistake 😂
You said it yourself. You cant think of a non incident reason, so why ask?

Oh hi Jafar, how are you?

(12-08-2025, 10:07 AM)Dexter the Dragoon Wrote: So Mac, tell me, how did you know that there was a specific role "Role Thief" so soon into the game... There is no mention of it in the OP.

(12-08-2025, 08:26 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: @Dexter the Dragoon not much to go on with either of those, but I agree with not discounting them. What stands out the most to me is is the Vincent quote about the strike rate.

Also in the low posters is Moe, who I keep nearly forgetting about.

(12-08-2025, 10:10 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: OK this is a mindfuck. So Mc was faking it, which means Jacob is not clear anymore.

(12-08-2025, 10:10 AM)Raymond the Shoemaker Wrote: OK this is a mindfuck. So Mc was faking it, which means Jacob is not clear anymore.