|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 16:58:27 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 16:58:27 GMT -5
I feel your pain about the late voting, Paul, but I have no idea what to do with a majority of the voters at the moment making only 2pt votes.
It makes no sense to me but I really doubt all three of them are scum.
Peeker's vote justifications seem the weakest of the three, and that where I'll put my vote for the moment:
Vote: 1st vote (3pts) : Peeker
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 16:59:14 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 16:59:14 GMT -5
grumble
[ vote ]1st vote (3pts) : Peeker [ /vote ]
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:00:08 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 17:00:08 GMT -5
For fuck sake. Don't we have a short cut? Or is that Giraffe...
1st vote (3pts) : Peeker
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:02:55 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 26, 2010 17:02:55 GMT -5
The shortcut only works if you leave a space between the vote tags and what's inside them.
Vote Count: Peeker 1., 2. Sis Coyote, 3. Meeko 1., 2. mentalguy, 3. Redskeezix 1. paulwho..., 2., 3. Luvbfwc 1., 2. mentalguy, 3. Sister Coyote 1., 2. peekercpa, 3. Nanook 1. Meeko, 2., 3. Cookies 1. peeker, 2., 3.
peekercpa(5): (Cookies 1st) (Sis Coyote 2nd) Mentalguy(4): (luvbfwc 2nd), (Meeko 2nd) Paulwhoisaghost (3): (Redskeezix 1st) Meeko(3): (Nanook 1st) Sis Coyote(2): (peeker 2nd)
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:10:26 GMT -5
Post by Red Skeezix on Feb 26, 2010 17:10:26 GMT -5
Wow.... seriously? I mean, the vote from Mental I accept. I think it is extremely weak for someone who is concerned about people casting weak votes.... but you vote... it's ridiculous. Especially because I later explained the reasoning for my post. Have you played with Meeko before? He gets out of control sometimes.... even a bit manic I would say... and it helps to kind of reel him back in. My post was my attempt to do so in a way that I knew would grab his attention. It had nothing to do with the game at all, just from one player to another. The vote is not ridiculous, you blatantly insulted another player with what I believe is the intent to inflame. Why is this scummy? Because, starting a meaningless argument or discussion about the tone, style or prolixity of Meeko's posts increases the noise while not contributing to the signal, something that I think scum would be more than happy to do. And now you are trying to mischaracterize your own post. It was an attempt to reel someone in, was it? I doubt it, it doesn't fit with what you said. And oh yeah, I have played with meeko before. Funny though that out of all of my content posts, you chose one of the few that has nothing to do with the game to vote me on. In the meantime, while you have stated your opinion on mass claim and borda, you haven't really contributed to the game much. I've been sticking my neck out defending my opinion on borda, Please, this is meaningless. Defending a strategy or strategic opinion is just about the biggest null in the book. It's not "sticking your neck out" as you so describe. And in fact I didn't see anything that I thought was scummy in your opinions, so I didn't comment on them. and you think I'm scum because I accused Meeko of having Aperger's? Or maybe it's something else about that post? Did I strike a nerve with you? Perhaps you have a loved one who has Asperger's and you took offense to my post? Whatever the case, linking that post to me being Scum is ridiculous. And you are wrong. This whole last section is what is ridiculous.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:26:42 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 17:26:42 GMT -5
Nanook : I have given more explanation and reason on my 2 point vote that Luv has. Why do I get your vote over him(?) ?
If I were to unvote and Revote Mental at 3 points, would you immediately unvote me? I somehow doubt that.
Then what is your real reason? Could you explain that?
Cookies :When I Went down the line, of reasons, I made it a point to say I would get back to post 80. Paul and Mental reminded me of You and I.
I brought your name up to reference and example, and to also serve as segue.
80 is Paul and Mental. Not Cookies. I'm not sure how I could have written that post any better.
Ed : I read your post. I don't like the implication that I didn't. Was there an issue with my answer? Question Asked, Question Answered.
---
How do you multi-quote? I see that Coyote can do it, why can't Raccoon?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:34:56 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 17:34:56 GMT -5
Sorry my mistake, Meeko.
I parsed "Cookies gets me back to your number 2. You mention post 80 as your reason to vote Paul. "
As, "Cookies, gets me back to your number 2. You mention post 80 as your reason to vote Paul." and I thought that the "you" and "your" were in reference to me.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:49:28 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 26, 2010 17:49:28 GMT -5
I am aware of that. But if we don't punish anti-Town play, especially on a Day like today where there isn't a whole lot of other things going on, then we're just giving scum a blank check to do whatever they want. I'm not willing to do that under the guise of "Oh it's just meeko being Meeko". this has been the exact logic used to lynch my townie ass the last three games. i seriously don't get it. ok, the old de facto standard was to lynch lurkers. now it seems to have evolved to lynch people who doing something "anti-town". i must not have been in on the distribution list when it was handed out. now, look you can do whatever, but cripes this all inclusive "anti-town" net that is being thrown around these days seems to be resulting in a lot of mis lynches and used as a real default catch all. i can't say me too or random or whatever so i'll just use a nice townie phrase of anti town to justify my vote.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:50:41 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Feb 26, 2010 17:50:41 GMT -5
Nanook : I have given more explanation and reason on my 2 point vote that Luv has. Why do I get your vote over him(?) ? If I were to unvote and Revote Mental at 3 points, would you immediately unvote me? I somehow doubt that. Then what is your real reason? Could you explain that? Responding out of order. My real reason is exactly what I stated. Not everything is a conpsiracy against Meeko. You got my vote over Luv because of the part I quoted. You specifically stated that you were voting 2 and that if you were wrong, at least it wasn't a three. The fact that you used a 2nd vote is less important to me than the reasoning you gave for doing so. If you changed it to a 3 pointer, I would reconsider the situation. I won't say I would definately unvote, nor will I will say that I would definately not unvote you. The reasoning you gave originally is still there, and requesting I unvote you if you change kinda adds into that. You would continue to be more interested in your own survival(getting a vote off you) than anything else. And that is still scummy. And before anyone asks, no self defense votes are not applicable to this line of reasoning. Voting to lynch the next candidate when you are on the line is, at it's heart, pro your side. If we assume a Town player doing it, they know what they are with 100% certainly. They can't say the same about the other person, so it makes sense to self defense vote.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:52:28 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Feb 26, 2010 17:52:28 GMT -5
I am aware of that. But if we don't punish anti-Town play, especially on a Day like today where there isn't a whole lot of other things going on, then we're just giving scum a blank check to do whatever they want. I'm not willing to do that under the guise of "Oh it's just meeko being Meeko". this has been the exact logic used to lynch my townie ass the last three games. i seriously don't get it. ok, the old de facto standard was to lynch lurkers. now it seems to have evolved to lynch people who doing something "anti-town". i must not have been in on the distribution list when it was handed out. now, look you can do whatever, but cripes this all inclusive "anti-town" net that is being thrown around these days seems to be resulting in a lot of mis lynches and used as a real default catch all. i can't say me too or random or whatever so i'll just use a nice townie phrase of anti town to justify my vote. I'm surprised you'd be against this vote as is. I would almost consider you to be the anti-meeko in this circumstance. You are ALL about the team over the individual. Can you not see how being the opposite, individual over team, is both a scummy thing to do and anti-town at the same time?
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 17:54:57 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 17:54:57 GMT -5
I am aware of that. But if we don't punish anti-Town play, especially on a Day like today where there isn't a whole lot of other things going on, then we're just giving scum a blank check to do whatever they want. I'm not willing to do that under the guise of "Oh it's just meeko being Meeko". Can someone please show me where I said I would never make a 3 point vote? I was asked why I made a 2 point vote. My response, in so many ways was because it is a first day vote. Here is the problem: If I make a 2 point vote on Day 1, and I am wrong, I believe that I am less responsible for the mislynch than a 3 point voter. Scum would love nothing more than to force mislynches AND to NK town.
Instead, if I am coerced into making a 3 point vote, on Day 1, which historically goes bad for town I believe it will be more of a problem down the line when someone tries to start a bandwagon on me.
I see this as a Damned if you do, Damned if you don't situation. The lesser of the two evils is to place a two point vote on a Day 1 vote than a three point vote.
I do not see how voting on Day 1 is anti-town. I do not see a reason for it to be punished.
Punish those who don't vote at all then.
That would make a LOT more sense that voting someone who frankly is a bit vote-shy, given historical evidence.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:00:05 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 18:00:05 GMT -5
this has been the exact logic used to lynch my townie ass the last three games. i seriously don't get it. ok, the old de facto standard was to lynch lurkers. now it seems to have evolved to lynch people who doing something "anti-town". i must not have been in on the distribution list when it was handed out. now, look you can do whatever, but cripes this all inclusive "anti-town" net that is being thrown around these days seems to be resulting in a lot of mis lynches and used as a real default catch all. i can't say me too or random or whatever so i'll just use a nice townie phrase of anti town to justify my vote. I'm surprised you'd be against this vote as is. I would almost consider you to be the anti-meeko in this circumstance. You are ALL about the team over the individual. Can you not see how being the opposite, individual over team, is both a scummy thing to do and anti-town at the same time? You know, I am not sure quite exactly how we got here, but we are here now, aren't we? Looks like I have at least two problems causing trouble for me. Unvote All3 point vote Nanook. And I think they just solved each other. Nanook is coming on strong with a force I don't think I have ever seen from him. Whereas, as other people have pointed out, I have been the same Liberal in everything EXCEPT gambling Meeko I have always been.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:02:03 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 26, 2010 18:02:03 GMT -5
nook you misunderstand me.
i was just remarking that the "anti town" net seems to have become the new buzz word. i agree that putting yourself above team is not ideal and i would never do that. but just because it is anti town (unless one happens to be a power role and then saving your ass should be paramount) doesn't make one scum. crud, even nillers should do all they can to stay alive. fuck, did you read paul's post about voting to save his ass. how would that be different?
and wonderful, i see i am in the Day one lead again.
crapalicious omgys justified vote by snipping.
and then a "oh, noes" that's weak vote.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:06:22 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 18:06:22 GMT -5
I am aware of that. But if we don't punish anti-Town play, especially on a Day like today where there isn't a whole lot of other things going on, then we're just giving scum a blank check to do whatever they want. I'm not willing to do that under the guise of "Oh it's just meeko being Meeko". Can someone please show me where I said I would never make a 3 point vote? I was asked why I made a 2 point vote. My response, in so many ways was because it is a first day vote. Here is the problem: If I make a 2 point vote on Day 1, and I am wrong, I believe that I am less responsible for the mislynch than a 3 point voter. Scum would love nothing more than to force mislynches AND to NK town.
Instead, if I am coerced into making a 3 point vote, on Day 1, which historically goes bad for town I believe it will be more of a problem down the line when someone tries to start a bandwagon on me.
I see this as a Damned if you do, Damned if you don't situation. The lesser of the two evils is to place a two point vote on a Day 1 vote than a three point vote.
I do not see how voting on Day 1 is anti-town. I do not see a reason for it to be punished.
Punish those who don't vote at all then.
That would make a LOT more sense that voting someone who frankly is a bit vote-shy, given historical evidence.
I completely disagree that there is any more or less responsibility for a mislynch based on the point count of any single vote made against the lynchee. By single vote I mean the voter only placing one vote on one player and not excercising their other two votes.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:11:22 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 18:11:22 GMT -5
Would it be better for the game in general, if we switch to an A B and C vote? instead of a first second and third?
I am getting confused in writing my own posts.
I think that terms such as "I will make a second first vote" et. al. will only get worse as the game goes on.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:26:34 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 18:26:34 GMT -5
Town should be putting as many points as possible down in blue for whoever they are most suspicious of. I can muster enough suspicion of peeker to vote for him, but I don't have enough building against anyone else to warrant using my other votes, so peeker gets my 3 points.
Meeko's explanation that he was trying to somehow mitigate the risk of having his responsibility in mislynches used against him later in the game compared to a 3pt voter is based on an false argument, and can be seen as trying to dodge accountability, but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt for now that he doesn't realize the implications of what he is saying and still trying to adjust to the new ru
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:27:12 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 18:27:12 GMT -5
+les
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:43:41 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 26, 2010 18:43:41 GMT -5
ok, second clean noser vote coming and a poke
unvote all
i certainly don't agree with sis's vote but at least she got off the pot.
he should have been on my original list but he kind of dropped off the radar
NAF
1. howdy post
2. no content mass claim comment
3. little content borda vote comment
4. really nothing as far as i can tell.
2 pt vote for NAF
and here is the danger that we always are presented with. with a weekend deadline looming and with the potential swing of 6 votes either way, scum control the lynch.
bad town, bad.
and since everyone feels that it's kind of a crapshoot on Day 1 (i don't) it can always be written off to:
[gomer pyle] awww shucks i just wasn't right[/gomer pyle]
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:46:14 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 26, 2010 18:46:14 GMT -5
Vote Count: Peeker 1., 2. NAF, 3. Meeko 1. Nanook, 2., 3. Redskeezix 1. paulwho..., 2., 3. Luvbfwc 1., 2. mentalguy, 3. Sister Coyote 1., 2. peekercpa, 3. Nanook 1. Meeko, 2., 3. Cookies 1. peeker, 2., 3.
peekercpa (5): (Cookies 1st) (Sis Coyote 2nd) Paulwhoisaghost (3): (Redskeezix 1st) Nanook (3): (Meeko 1st) Meeko (3): (Nanook 1st) NAF (2): (peeker 2nd) Mentalguy (2): (luvbfwc 2nd)
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 18:56:16 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 18:56:16 GMT -5
Peeker: Why the 2pt vote and not the 3pt?
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:00:15 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 19:00:15 GMT -5
Cookies, lets go slow here.
I am not familiar with the term "False Argument". Could you enlighten me?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:12:58 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 19:12:58 GMT -5
Bruno the Townie places a 3pt vote on Jenny, presenting a case for why she is the most suspicious. Bill does not place any other votes that Day.
MaryAnne the Townie places a 2 pt vote on Jenny, presenting a case for why she is the most suspicious. MaryAnne does not place any other votes that Day.
A bunch of other hypothetical people make votes but their votes and alignments are not relevant to my point, the only other datapoints that are relevant is that Jenny ends up being lynched by 2pts and she flips as Town.
In no way is MaryAnne any less responsible for Jenny's lynch than Bruno.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:15:03 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 19:15:03 GMT -5
Drat. That Bill should be Bruno. I forgot Bill was playing when I was making up my story and neglected to change that one. No smearing of BillMc was intended.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:21:48 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 19:21:48 GMT -5
Bruno the Townie places a 3pt vote on Jenny, presenting a case for why she is the most suspicious. Bill does not place any other votes that Day. MaryAnne the Townie places a 2 pt vote on Jenny, presenting a case for why she is the most suspicious. MaryAnne does not place any other votes that Day. A bunch of other hypothetical people make votes but their votes and alignments are not relevant to my point, the only other datapoints that are relevant is that Jenny ends up being lynched by 2pts and she flips as Town. In no way is MaryAnne any less responsible for Jenny's lynch than Bruno. And if Jenny ends up getting lynched by just 1 vote, with only Bruno and Mary Anne making their original votes? And for clarification, I was asking for a definition on "False Argument" , away from mafia. I was assuming you were suggesting I had a fallacy somewhere. -- One that could exist outside of Mafia.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:24:02 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 26, 2010 19:24:02 GMT -5
Peeker: Why the 2pt vote and not the 3pt? c'mon cooksdo you read for comprehension or just confirmation? i already stated that i would be reserving the 3 votes for folks that i felt were scummy and the 2 votes for the clean nosers (patent pending per sach). see that's the whole point, i voted for sis initially because her posts did not seem to be consistent to what i have seen in the past. NOT A GRUDGE VOTE FOR GOODNESS SAKES. it's just that i have never seen her post like that. now it's NAF. only problem with him is that he is new dad and all that. so it just feels a wee bit off. but i am not ready to say that anything he or she said (because they haven't said shit) that deserves a full vote. crud, cooks you and i have played this game a long time. i have never been an FOSer. 'cause i think that is lame shit. oh fuck you suck but i won't really vote you. but in this game i can FOS to my hearts content because it has meaning.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:29:43 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 19:29:43 GMT -5
poor choice of words on my part. Invalid would have been better maybe?
And it really doesn't matter how many points tip Jenny over the edge in my analogy. Bruno and MaryAnne would hold an equal share of responsibility. They're both Town so they have the same motivation.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:35:46 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 19:35:46 GMT -5
poor choice of words on my part. Invalid would have been better maybe? And it really doesn't matter how many points tip Jenny over the edge in my analogy. Bruno and MaryAnne would hold an equal share of responsibility. They're both Town so they have the same motivation. So, if you loan me 3 bucks, and I give you back 2, we would be even?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:35:37 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 19:35:37 GMT -5
Peeker: If all you have at the end of the Day is a 2pt vote on a clean-noser, does it not logically follow that that is the player you find the most suspicious and therefor they are deserving of a 3pt vote?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:43:15 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 19:43:15 GMT -5
Ed : I read your post. I don't like the implication that I didn't. Was there an issue with my answer? Question Asked, Question Answered. --- There is an issue in that you didn't answer the direct questions I asked you. Here's the part you 'snipped' Here was your post that your claiming answered my question: I don't see the point in making a 2nd place votes. Snip. Maybe I'm missing something, so can you please explain the reasoning again. It's Day 1.I am frankly reluctant to vote higher on a Day 1 vote. If we could all vote 2 points on Day 1, wouldn't it be the same if we all voted 3 ? Alternately, if we do lynch scum today, wouldn't it be a good data point to have for those who voted 3, over 2 today? Do you see that you didn't actually answer the questions I asked?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:46:16 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 19:46:16 GMT -5
No. The only reason there is a possibility that Bruno could potentially be perceived as more responsible than MaryAnne is because MaryAnne decided to only place a 2pt vote on the player she sees as the most suspicious.
If she had just placed the 3pt vote there is no possibiity of such a perception. And since anyone who would choose to suspect Bruno more than MaryAnne because of the 1pt difference in their vote, would be still applying suspicion to a town player, I fail to see how either MaryAnne's decision to only place a 2pt vote or the decision to put more accountability on Bruno than MaryAnne does a damn thing to mitigate any risks for the Town.
|
|