|
Post by Sister Coyote on Feb 2, 2010 22:27:56 GMT -5
This is one of those there's no way I can convince you otherwise, but I suspect my strategy as the cheater in these early stages of the game (if I were the cheater, which I am not) would be to pick a mid-range but non-zero answer.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 3, 2010 18:12:25 GMT -5
At this point I'm likely to vote NAF again, but I am so unpassionate about that choice that I doubt I'll be very convincing to anyone.
His justification for voting for Ed is the flip side of my justification for him (NAF) and both positions have they're share of potential flaws, but so far only one of us had had a hand in offing a Townie Ed. He had a lot of control yesterDay, and while he may be just a victim of circumstances, I've gotta put a vote down for someone, and that is how it is looking to be for me at this moment.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 3, 2010 18:14:10 GMT -5
Egads what a horribly written passage.
That should read:
His justification for voting for Ed is the flip side of my justification for voting for him (NAF) and while both positions have their share of potential flaws, so far only one of us had had a hand in offing a Townie Ed. He had a lot of control yesterDay, and while he may be just a victim of circumstances, I've gotta put a vote down for someone, and that is how it is looking to be for me at this moment.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 3, 2010 19:13:03 GMT -5
Egads what a horribly written passage. That should read: His justification for voting for Ed is the flip side of my justification for voting for him (NAF) and while both positions have their share of potential flaws, so far only one of us had had a hand in offing a Townie Ed. He had a lot of control yesterDay, and while he may be just a victim of circumstances, I've gotta put a vote down for someone, and that is how it is looking to be for me at this moment. So you don't like my case for Red, or Red's case for Sister?
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 3, 2010 19:13:53 GMT -5
NETA: I mean, come on. Get passionate here. This is still sort of mafia.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 3, 2010 19:14:37 GMT -5
Also, earlier in this very thread you made a farily compelling case for why I was less likely to be the cheater than others based on my desire to skip over TL.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 3, 2010 19:14:55 GMT -5
I like posting
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 3, 2010 20:07:56 GMT -5
Also, earlier in this very thread you made a farily compelling case for why I was less likely to be the cheater than others based on my desire to skip over TL. But that post also included the caveat that your proposal could also be a dirty and rotten attempt at reverse psychology and lying. I'd consider switching to Red, but it would be a leap of faith with so little to go on. The only thing that smells funny to me was that he didn't seem to have an issue with any of the mechanics when Meeko was asking if the official votes should be divulged before anyone spoke publicly about why they had voted as they did. He encouraged Meeko to divulge sooner than later. It could be seen as the Cheater taking the opportunity to further exploit the Town's lack of data and try and advance the game with as little attention to that data as possible. He then decided the he did in fact have a series of questions about the mechanics toDay. It could be seen as inconsistency. The problem there is that I had the same behavior as he did on Day 1, so I'm tempted to say null tell.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 3, 2010 23:16:55 GMT -5
I'd consider switching to Red, but it would be a leap of faith with so little to go on. The only thing that smells funny to me was that he didn't seem to have an issue with any of the mechanics when Meeko was asking if the official votes should be divulged before anyone spoke publicly about why they had voted as they did. He encouraged Meeko to divulge sooner than later. It could be seen as the Cheater taking the opportunity to further exploit the Town's lack of data and try and advance the game with as little attention to that data as possible. He then decided the he did in fact have a series of questions about the mechanics toDay. It could be seen as inconsistency. The problem there is that I had the same behavior as he did on Day 1, so I'm tempted to say null tell. I guess I don't understand how that smells funny, the votes were already in. Talking about the votes before the reveal would be less productive since having the vote data before resuming discussion leads to more informed discussion. I raised the question today before the votes were cast because the wording of Meeko's post today was not crystal clear to me. Compare: Yesterday's post answer reveal instructions "Feel free to comment on where you are placing your vote now. You are voting for who you believe to be the "Dirty Rotten Cheater"." with today's post answer reveal instructions: "Let's start voting discussions. I think we still need official votes first in PM though. Once I give the go ahead, you can mention who you voted for." They seem to have different implications, so I was unsure, so I asked.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 3, 2010 23:45:02 GMT -5
Well blue cheese smells funny and tastes damn good too.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 4, 2010 14:27:08 GMT -5
Are we working on a vote PM deadline?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 4, 2010 14:27:27 GMT -5
on = under
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Feb 4, 2010 16:12:33 GMT -5
Are we working on a vote PM deadline? I have two in already. It's up to you I guess. I mean, not reall a deadline, but we cant go forward with out it.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 4, 2010 16:19:59 GMT -5
Well no one has said that they've voted and Meeko says he already got two votes. I thought we were still discussing. I guess I'll just vote.
Who had sent their vote in before this post?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 4, 2010 17:53:53 GMT -5
I hadn't voted yet but I just did for NAF.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Feb 4, 2010 19:34:09 GMT -5
One vote left.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Feb 5, 2010 12:29:44 GMT -5
Paces through the thread impatiently.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Feb 5, 2010 14:20:33 GMT -5
I had people from my old Job Email me today asking me for information on an account. Been working with that all day.
BRB
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Feb 5, 2010 14:26:03 GMT -5
End of Voting Round 2
3 Votes for RedSkeezix [Total Lost, NAF, Coyote] 1 Vote for NAF [Cookies] 1 Vote for Coyote [Skeezix]
Red Skeezix is Eliminated........
And WAS the Dirty Rotten Cheater!!!!!!!!
We can continue, but, I think we need to ask all involved. I have read the concerns on the questions.
The problem with the questions, is that all along, it was my guess as to how Common, or how Rare the answers were.
We needed to have a survey pool of questions from 100 or so people, and rank the answers based on rarity from that pool.
Up to you gang, Town has won, OR we can continue playing this thing out. I would need to randomize and inform a remaining player that they are the cheater, complete with the answers, if we continue.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 5, 2010 14:34:45 GMT -5
I'll keep posting my answers but I don't think that will be the consensus.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Feb 5, 2010 14:36:39 GMT -5
I'm game whatever the decision is.
I think Skeezix thought I was a threat.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Feb 5, 2010 14:40:12 GMT -5
Well, this has always been a trial run game. I think you guys got enough of it to know how it should work.
Admitedly not the best presentation, but do you guys think it has a future? [That is, in general, not to this game in particular.]
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 5, 2010 14:43:53 GMT -5
Eh, I didn't think you were a threat, you were the only person who wasn't voting for me that I could find anything suspicious about. If I had voted NAF or Total it would have been OMGUS. Since they both mentioned suspicions of me. I couldn't put together anything on cookies since she didn't hit middle on day 2. So I was stuck with you. Oh, well. Fun idea, but it might go better if the voting was in the open and you could vote/unvote, not sure though.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 5, 2010 14:48:26 GMT -5
Oh, well. Fun idea, but it might go better if the voting was in the open and you could vote/unvote, not sure though. I say this because being silent certainly helped Total Lost avoid suspicion. I believe she voted me without even posting between answers reveal and now. If the voting was more public then there would be more accountability and it would be easier to survive the earlier rounds.
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Feb 5, 2010 14:58:07 GMT -5
Oh, well. Fun idea, but it might go better if the voting was in the open and you could vote/unvote, not sure though. I say this because being silent certainly helped Total Lost avoid suspicion. I believe she voted me without even posting between answers reveal and now. If the voting was more public then there would be more accountability and it would be easier to survive the earlier rounds. I think I would make a couple of changes to the game, and this is one of them. Open up the voting and have it vote like real mafia. It gives the game a bit of action and keeps people involved. Secondly, I think double the number of players and throw in a second cheater that works with the first cheater. Having the cheater be a solo player took away a major mafia dynamic. Thirdly, have the game be won or lost only on points only. Town doesn't win if the cheater is caught, the cheater just has their score frozen at that place (because they are lynched). Same with anyone really. Town lynches freeze out that player from further participation. This means that people will have more reason to try to score high early giving the game more momentum into the end. It also pits every player against every other player in a way. Have the game last a set number of rounds, but once the cheater is caught the lynch goes away as an option so when to lynch the cheater comes into play. Is it always best to lynch on Day 1 if you catch them? I am just spitballing here. But I think any of the above, if properly tweaked and examined, could make the game a bit more dynamic. In the end, I think it's that level of dynamics that is missing. I don't know how to fix the issue of the answers though.
|
|
|
Post by Sister Coyote on Feb 5, 2010 15:08:10 GMT -5
Skeezix: I intentionally posted what I did because I had already voted for you, but was comfortable making it look like I might be voting for NAF.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 5, 2010 15:10:35 GMT -5
Voting in public handicaps some Cheater dynamics though.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Meeko on Feb 5, 2010 15:12:14 GMT -5
we would either need to poll people, perhaps set up a poll over here, and then run it on Dope, or get some premade results,.... Wonder if family feud board game would help.
shrug.
I thought that voting, would take away from it, if the Cheater could see the votes, and then swing the vote the other way, off of him or her.
I mean, I guess that is the one piece of Cheater that can't translate to Mafia.
If we put in more players, we would need more answers for them to give. Thats the one draw back.
I had written down, 18 players with 3 cheaters but then you need questions that everyone can answer.
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 5, 2010 15:16:06 GMT -5
Voting in public handicaps some Cheater dynamics though. Since the voting is public (eventually) anyways, the cheater is unable to say one thing and vote another. Having the voting private robs the cheater of the ability to defend against players voting on a whim. Skeezix: I intentionally posted what I did because I had already voted for you, but was comfortable making it look like I might be voting for NAF. So when did you vote? Right after the answers?
|
|
|
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 5, 2010 15:21:27 GMT -5
I thought that voting, would take away from it, if the Cheater could see the votes, and then swing the vote the other way, off of him or her. But town players could do the same. So it's fair?
|
|