Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 19:06:31 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Sept 11, 2007 19:06:31 GMT -5
My God! I just realized that my sister is exactly like my cat!
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 19:08:34 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Sept 11, 2007 19:08:34 GMT -5
*The emotional crisis being "I'm bored. Pay attention to me. I hear you typing. Are you listening to me? Why are you typing when you should be paying attention to me?" But, if you're paying attention to her, you're not paying attention to us. That is soooooo unfair. And threatening us with no drinks 9 days from now is way over the top!!!! Kill me now.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 19:18:28 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Sept 11, 2007 19:18:28 GMT -5
Also, Idle attacked me during night 1. And I think he kicked my dog.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 19:42:46 GMT -5
Post by Caerie on Sept 11, 2007 19:42:46 GMT -5
My God! I just realized that my sister is exactly like my cat! ...does she lay on your keyboard, too?
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 19:53:19 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Sept 11, 2007 19:53:19 GMT -5
Hey, FCoD, I really like the idea of including your Mafia history in your sig. Hope you don't mind that I just stole it. By all means, please do . I interpret the majority rule this way (indulge me the clunky use of math-like-stuff):
To be absolutely completely safe, we need to have (15 + n) firm votes at the end of the day, for the same person, with n=number of scum. This allows for all possible WIFOM scenarios in case every last scum tries to throw the vote.
We probably won't achieve "completely safe" very easily or often, especially since no one but the scum know how many scum we have. Allowing for possible alternate groupings, no one but some of any "birds of a feather " groupings know how many of anything that we have.
So to further refine my "completely safe" equation, at the end of Day 1 we'd need (15 + BoF1 + BoF2, etc...) firm votes by the end of the day to eliminate the possibility of anyone throwing their weight around and causing a no-lynch. The firmer the consensus towards "completely safe" as the upper limit, the better our chances of having the day end as we (as in the collective we) want it to end. Please notice that toDay, we can never reach more than 15 votes for a person, because as soon as the 15th vote hits, the Day ends. This also means that people that want to vote for X may not be able to if they are too late -- an interesting side effect I didn't think of before. Also, Idle attacked me during night 1. Classic! FYI for the Mafia n00bs -- I use the terms "toDay" and "toNight" to refer to in-game days and nights, as opposed to calendar days. Some thoughts...perhaps we could cut back on the empty posts? The Day just began and we're at 7 pages already!! I think about two pages were spent debating the definition of "majority". (BTW it can be used either way). It's going to make it a lot harder to figure shit out if we have to wade through 200 POS (Posts of Shit). That's my two cents. Also, I'd love to hear from dnooman... --FCOD
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 19:53:48 GMT -5
Post by mtgman on Sept 11, 2007 19:53:48 GMT -5
I don't see how that's a reason or why mtgman says I deserve a mod sanction just for not understanding a rule fully. Yeah, let's lynch everyone who needs clarifcation with the rules. 4) You may only ask questions about the mechanics of the game in PM form. Please PM both Kat and myself. One of us will answer and if it seems appropriate we will post to the thread. Enjoy, Steven
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:06:56 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 11, 2007 20:06:56 GMT -5
Please notice that toDay, we can never reach more than 15 votes for a person, because as soon as the 15th vote hits, the Day ends. This also means that people that want to vote for X may not be able to if they are too late -- an interesting side effect I didn't think of before. Yes of course. Replace "votes" with "commitment to vote" and my post still applies. As we approach the wire, we need to have all (15 + x +y+...) ready to go, and if there are last minute switches, those key slack votes need to be prepared to keep pouring it on until the magic 15 is reached. I also just realized that this whole line of thought means that we have to keep in mind that there is an innocent-lynch danger zone when the total number of votes reaches at most whatever = (15 - x - y -...) because at that moment we are at risk of the various BoF groups being able to hammer the death of an innocent. So we will need to keep a few unvotes at our finger tips until we are as sure as possible on the consensus target.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:07:54 GMT -5
Post by dnooman on Sept 11, 2007 20:07:54 GMT -5
Also, I'd love to hear from dnooman... --FCOD Did you need me to repost my last post? Did it not make sense to you?
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:27:12 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Sept 11, 2007 20:27:12 GMT -5
Sorry, guys, I'm going to step away for 24 hours. Between people not being able to understand what I thought was a simple rule, and posts like below, I'm getting frustrated. No harm, no foul, but I'll see you guys tomorrow or Thursday. Cheers. <snip> I also just realized that this whole line of thought means that we have to keep in mind that there is an innocent-lynch danger zone when the total number of votes reaches at most whatever = (15 - x - y -...) because at that moment we are at risk of the various BoF groups being able to hammer the death of an innocent. So we will need to keep a few unvotes at our finger tips until we are as sure as possible on the consensus target. What does this even mean, really? How are we going to keep these "unvotes" at our finger tips? Who's fingertips? Yours? How do we know that said fingertips won't be scumtips? It's good on paper, but it doesn't make practical sense.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:41:41 GMT -5
Post by whatthefrak on Sept 11, 2007 20:41:41 GMT -5
Holy crap! I just spent an hour and a half reading seven new pages of posts, and I still have no idea what's going on.
On the other hand, I have a little more insight as to the point of the game, now. It's as much figuring out who the bad guys are as proving to the good guys that you're also one of them, and the catch-22 of trying to prove you're good making you sound bad.
Oh, and I won't make any more judgments (joking or no) until I have a little something more to go on. FOS on me for doing it before.
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:45:12 GMT -5
Post by Parzival on Sept 11, 2007 20:45:12 GMT -5
In line with Cookies statement about the innocent-lynch zones, I had a similar thought:
If we somehow end up with some number of votes close to the Magic Number (15 for toDay), and the time to deadline is > 24 hours, does it make sense to have some sort of freeze/pause for discussion instituted? To be honest, I'm not so sure as when I first thought of it, but it does prevent potential speed-lynches.
I realize it doesn't necessarily make it easier to spot scum. They'll probably find some way to work with it. But it may just provide a bit of needed time in some cases (role-claims are almost inevitable in this game), and at least try to avoid last-minute frenzies that allow the excuse of "well the end of that was crazy - I wasn't clear what was going on".
I did just think of one helpful idea - when you vote, include the total number of votes for the candidate as you see it. You won't always be right (simulposts ought to be rare, though). I do think it'll be useful since we need to be the ones aware of when the lynch happens.
I think a format of Vote dotchan(4) is okay to mean I'm the 4th voter for dotchan.
What do people think?
|
|
Death By Irony
FGM
The Former Mandate of Heaven/Current Gastard Night Mod
I'm my own mind-altering substance!
Posts: 109
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:51:31 GMT -5
Post by Death By Irony on Sept 11, 2007 20:51:31 GMT -5
I think a format of Vote dotchan(4) is okay to mean I'm the 4th voter for dotchan. Hey, I'm not even in the game yet! Quit trying to lynch me! vote Top Dog
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:52:19 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 11, 2007 20:52:19 GMT -5
People need to be careful before placing the votes that could move us into that danger zone, and people will need to basically sponsor their votes, meaning that by voting, you take responsibility to unvote in case it looks like the building consensus might be hijacked into a scummy hammer. Exactly how such a hijack might look is the $50,000 question. I think the level of chaos is going to be quite high, and innocent hesitation and confusion will be difficult to separate from scummy manipulation. It is true for every mafia game, but could potentially be particularly true for this one. I don't know how useful these back of the envelope "calculations" might end up being, but they're all can really contributing at this point, unless you'd like me to read my role PM out loud in front of the class.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:54:56 GMT -5
Post by Mad The Swine on Sept 11, 2007 20:54:56 GMT -5
I think a format of Vote dotchan(4) is okay to mean I'm the 4th voter for dotchan. Hey, I'm not even in the game yet! Quit trying to lynch me! vote Top DogPlease quit posting til if and when you are in the game.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 20:55:39 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Sept 11, 2007 20:55:39 GMT -5
I don't see how that's a reason or why mtgman says I deserve a mod sanction just for not understanding a rule fully. Yeah, let's lynch everyone who needs clarifcation with the rules. 4) You may only ask questions about the mechanics of the game in PM form. Please PM both Kat and myself. One of us will answer and if it seems appropriate we will post to the thread. Enjoy, Steven Ahhh. I read that too...but I guess I just thought that it was a general rule clear up and not about game mechanics. Apoligizing if wrong/mistaken.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 21:03:18 GMT -5
Post by zuma on Sept 11, 2007 21:03:18 GMT -5
People need to be careful before placing the votes that could move us into that danger zone, and people will need to basically sponsor their votes, meaning that by voting, you take responsibility to unvote in case it looks like the building consensus might be hijacked into a scummy hammer. Exactly how such a hijack might look is the $50,000 question. I think the level of chaos is going to be quite high, and innocent hesitation and confusion will be difficult to separate from scummy manipulation. I don't know what's so difficult with this. I don't see a problem taking someone to 13 or so votes. If someone hammers without town concensus, I'll consider that a scummy action and they'll recieve my vote first thing in the morning. I don't think there is a need to hide in a corner and bite your nails worrying about scum jumping in pushing someone over the top... If they want to expose themselves like that, great. It also means everyone just needs to be careful about putting the lynching vote on someone, as it probably will not be viewed as an innocent mistake. At least by me, anyway
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 21:20:12 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Sept 11, 2007 21:20:12 GMT -5
I don't know what's so difficult with this. I don't see a problem taking someone to 13 or so votes. If someone hammers without town concensus, I'll consider that a scummy action and they'll recieve my vote first thing in the morning. I don't think there is a need to hide in a corner and bite your nails worrying about scum jumping in pushing someone over the top... If they want to expose themselves like that, great. This says exactly what I've been trying to write out for the past 15 minutes (and subsequently erasing, rewriting, erasing again, rewriting, etc.). To me, I feel like if somebody ends up there at 13 or so votes, a good majority of the people that have voted for said person will at least think that person is scum or acting scummy. Sure, there's probably going to be a few people that are like "wellll, I don't really think this person is the most scummy person out there, but I don't want to have a no-lynch so I'll vote this way" and probably a few scum scattered in there as well, but does anybody really think that every single scum is going to pile onto a vote for a townie the very first day? I personally think that's a little farfetched. And considering how much we've talked about how we don't want unwanted hammering without full town approval to death in the first 24 hours, anybody that accidentally hammers a person at this point either hasn't been reading or is scum, and will be treated as such by me (and probably other people as well).
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 21:24:06 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Sept 11, 2007 21:24:06 GMT -5
My equations represent limits. Concepts to strive towards as opposed to strict prescriptions.
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 21:30:27 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Sept 11, 2007 21:30:27 GMT -5
Great googly moogly. That's a lot of activity.
I note that Roosh still hasn't arrived to fill us in on the contents of his magic bag (and thanks, capybara, wherever you are, for the perfect metaphor), so I'm going to wait until he does for further comment on our previous conversation.
I think the debate over the definition of the word "majority" needs no further comment.
But I have a thought, one I'm not sure will be popular, but reading through this thread has clarified something about this setup that I think needs to be said.
NAF and Kat, whether intentionally or un-, have created a diabolical setup. We have ten, count 'em, TEN, real life days of this. We're on page 8 and we still haven't even really talked lynchings yet. By the time we reach the end of toDay, we are going to have thirty pages. Thirty long pages. We are in real danger of having our conversation become so saturated with noise, and so great in volume, that it becomes utterly useless - not just for toDay, but for later analysis. If Days One and Two, together, wind up at sixty or seventy pages of posts, does anyone think they will be up to cogent analysis of the proceedings on Day Three? Or Day Nine? I don't.
So here's my proposition, for what it's worth:
With all due respect to the game setup, we do not need ten real life days to settle on a Day One lynch target. I believe in order to increase the signal:noise ratio, we should deliberately limit ourselves to a shorter Day - pushing a majority at the end of the fifth real life day if at all possible.
I know this probably sounds out there, but please think it over. Ten days. Ten days of this. Ten days worth of posts to get through when the time comes to look back on toDay in light of new information we'll soon receive. Is that a net benefit to the town? I say not. What say y'all?
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 21:47:23 GMT -5
Post by Parzival on Sept 11, 2007 21:47:23 GMT -5
Whether it's five days of noise or ten days of noise, it's still scum winning the noise battle. I don't mind taking our time, as long as we can take our time and make sense. From the looks of it, in a day or so we'll get down to business - I hope.
I think the things we need to think about, unless we're going to start throwing FOS's or votes, are the voting and the closed setup. Those are the things that are the biggest change from previous games, and probably require the most discussion for aspects of the game.
Forget the earlier part of my last post (about cutoff/waiting/freeze periods) - does my numbering of votes idea make sense to anyone?
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 21:58:28 GMT -5
Post by Pollux Oil on Sept 11, 2007 21:58:28 GMT -5
If we get down to business fairly quickly, I'm all for not having ten days of posts to wade through. However, if noise continues and we spend more days discussing how we need to vote, I don't want to lynch somebody on day 5 when we only *actually* discussed lynching for like 12 hours.
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 22:54:24 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Sept 11, 2007 22:54:24 GMT -5
Jeezum, a lot to read already. I agree with storyteller that if we go ten days of this we are not going to want to wade in here later on when we need to. I certainly don't envy cookies going back through 80+ pages in the Cult game. I pledge to keep fluff posts to a minimum or in the Boost Your Post Count thread. I hope everyone else does too.
If we could make Day 1 shorter I'd be all for that. I don't want to burn out on Day 1, or have people losing interest and not posting. There is beginning to be enough information that one can make an informed vote.
And dotchan, we love you, but if you can not post in the active game threads it will help with the noise:signal ratio. We'll come talk to you in the fluffy threads. ;D
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:21:10 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Sept 11, 2007 23:21:10 GMT -5
Ok for the fifth time I'm going to try to post this. Fucking IE, I'm back at opera and now back at IE again arrrghh. I've posted a lot of fluff, trying to not be a lurker and figuring out what's going on. Here's my first substance post. At least in these first few days, I don't think hammering would be nearly as bad as not lynching. If we get lucky and nail an Alliance member with a lynch early, the hammering players votes will help distinguish Crew from Scum. (this, of course, is based on my understanding that the loss of a scum early in the game is less helpful than an excuse later in the game for the scum). If there are any Reavers in this game, I'll bet credits to crackers that there's one, and he's a Psychopath.
Now, as far as first day voting goes: I've only ever played this game live, and first votes tend to be based on hearing some slight shifting as Scum try to silently inform the Mod who they want to sha. I'm going to go out on a limb and throw out an initial vote, based on nothing. (If anyone wants to instruct me what I'm supposed to be looking for in first day scumtells, I'll be happy to listen)
Vote: whatthefrak How does this work? "the hammering players votes will help distinguish Crew from Scum." What are hammering players and how do they help distinguish crew from scum? Further, what does this mean? "the loss of a scum early in the game is less helpful than an excuse later in the game for the scum" Seems like scum talking to scum to me. And then seven pages later this 'hammering' thing comes up again: Today at 8:52pm, ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies wrote: ZUMA SAYS Again the 'hammer' thing and does anybody but me think the '13 votes or so' bit is kind of contrived. No crew will want to vote 14 or 15 no matter what with this philosophy because crew won't know for sure if they're right or wrong. Scum know who is who and can get on the band wagon early, so don't have to vote last. Surprise, surprise they are never 'hammered' the next day. I think this kind of thinking is very dangerous. And yeah a scum would never assume the last two voters made an "innocent mistake" He wouldn't have to assume anything. And finally we have this: ARTURAS SAYS Again with the hammering. And in one breath excusing the last or next to last voter and in the other accusing "anybody that accidentally hammers a person at this point either hasn't been reading or is scum, and will be treated as such by me" So it appears its a lose lose proposition for the 14th and 15th voters. And this leads us to the final solution of never voting anybody out. Which equals SCUM WINS. I don't know if this made much sense. I've had problems with the interface and the quote thing, and it's been a long day. I say vote: zumaFoS aturas and diomedesOK I can't make the qoute thing work in any browser I'm tired of fucking with it. I keep getting error on page, so I'm posting it like this.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:21:30 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Sept 11, 2007 23:21:30 GMT -5
okay. I'm her.e but on page 7.
So when i catch up i'll post.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:23:53 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Sept 11, 2007 23:23:53 GMT -5
Thought so far. I don't like Idle's behavior, but i didn't feel it warnted a vote. Jeebus, Pygmy.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:34:53 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Sept 11, 2007 23:34:53 GMT -5
I note that Roosh still hasn't arrived to fill us in on the contents of his magic bag (and thanks, capybara, wherever you are, for the perfect metaphor), so I'm going to wait until he does for further comment on our previous conversation. ~Snip~ With all due respect to the game setup, we do not need ten real life days to settle on a Day One lynch target. I believe in order to increase the signal:noise ratio, we should deliberately limit ourselves to a shorter Day - pushing a majority at the end of the fifth real life day if at all possible. 2 Points on that. You posted that @ 10pm EST. I said I'd be back at 12am EST. Lo and behold i'm here at 12am EST. Jeez, man. Get a clock I think you did this last game too. Heh. If i say i'll be posting at a certain time, i'll be there. Point 2: I totally agree with you 100% on the Majority thing. In fact, I think after i've said my points (in my next post, spaced to break up things) that we should be having these potential w/in 24-48 hours. (too soon? Just wait and i'll explain). But yeah. Patience grasshopper. And totally agree on the sig/noise ratio, and on doing these things better. point 3: Atarus -- I also agree with you, saying I have 10 days to post, and then not posting would be incondusive to the town, esp. if i feel its pertinent info. Which is exactly why I'm now going to SHARE my info. Hope that'll help clear things up for you. As we'll still have 8 days or so left to talk about it. Anyways, here goes.
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:36:18 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Sept 11, 2007 23:36:18 GMT -5
Time for the Bedtime Vote Count:
dnooman (1): FCoD Idle Thoughts (2): zuma, Pygmy Rugger Roosh (2): Blaster Master, storyteller whathefrak (1): Diomedes zuma (2): Idle Thoughts, sinjin
|
|
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:36:41 GMT -5
Post by zuma on Sept 11, 2007 23:36:41 GMT -5
Again the 'hammer' thing and does anybody but me think the '13 votes or so' bit is kind of contrived. How the f.uck is "13 or so" "contrived" Lynch is at 15. 12-13-14 and we are close to a lynch. You are aware that a lynch is at 15, I hope. "8" would be contrived. "18" would really be contrived. No crew will want to vote 14 or 15 no matter what with this philosophy because crew won't know for sure if they're right or wrong Only crew who are pretty fucking stupid would "not want to vote" because of this. All we're saying is that putting vote #15 without town consensus would be viewed as scummy. Jeez.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:46:27 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on Sept 11, 2007 23:46:27 GMT -5
First off, with regard to Storyteller, I fully agree. I think ten days is WAY too long. Yes, shortenning the day is often not in the town's interest, but we only gain information in so many ways. On the first Day, with no voting records, no established behaviors, etc., we can really only see how people vote, react to votes, and their discussions... our best weapon, by far, is the lynch, because we gain solid knowledge.
That is, I think it's important that we encourage discussion, get some votes out, and see how people react before anyone gets hammered, but it sure as hell won't take ten days to do that, and it will reach a point where we're just waiting around.
OTOH, we can use that extra time to our advantage. We can set earlier deadlines (say, aim for a lynch on the fifth day or whatever), and if some new information comes up (oops, someone slipped, or a role claim) we have time to adjust our strategy and our votes.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Sept 11, 2007 23:53:18 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on Sept 11, 2007 23:53:18 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure CatInaSuit is right. If we get to next Sunday without having laid the hammer down on someone, I think we should agree to a declared deadline a day or so before the mod-imposed one, and just have a mass-switch to whomever is the vote-leader at that point. The positives of this idea is that we don't get a no-lynch. The drawbacks, of course, are that the small numbers of the scum (I'm thinking there must be 6) can be much more powerful in such a situation. What do people think about this idea? I know this is an older post, but I just read it. IMO, this is a bad idea, let explain with an example. Let's say our top votees are A who has 7, B who has 6 and C who has 6. This means there's 9 votes outstanding. Now, chances are there are scum votes in there, it's entirely possible that a majority ofthe people who aren't on the top vote getters just don't see A as scummy and, left to choose between the three themselves, the votes might end up with B and/or C above A. This method would easily allow a scum or two to make a tip, near the deadline, and then, quite literally, force a bunch of people to vote for someone they don't see as scummy, and largely obfuscating their actions behind a bunch of people moaning and groaning about voting for someone they don't think is scummy. We MUST have a choice, even if it's between the lesser of two evils, otherwise we lose vote accountability, and put the game in the hands of the loud and the early voters. Hence, my suggestion of doing it in a couple of stages.
|
|