|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 9:59:13 GMT -5
Post by kassia on Nov 16, 2007 9:59:13 GMT -5
Random.org (which I believe may be a bit psychic) has spoken:
NAF for Guv
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 10:02:50 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 16, 2007 10:02:50 GMT -5
I just want to remind everyone that the Guv is also free and empowered to implement a stay of execution, whether or not the motivations for that stay are pro-town, and whether or not the action is favored by the majority. My current ponderings on the Guv is that, regardless of the method used to elect or whatever "consensus" might be voiced by the players as to each unique Guv role, is that I am very wary of what the scum will do while there. On that note, the opening days of most of the games I've seen or played in have been red with the blood of innocent deaths, so there's a good chance that (even if we do end up selecting a Guv by voting for the most suspicious person, or one of the three players with the lowest post count) we will not end up plunking a scum into the Guv seat. On the other, other hand, things could get very complicated if the consensus/majority views on a Guv shift while s/he's in office. For example, we put a "bad" (suspicious, lurker) person in the office, but s/he manages to politik their way into an actual pro-town leadership role? Or we put a Golden Child in the office, and use their position to play us for chumps towards a scum/other advantage. The Guv is just as responsible for justifying his choices as any of us. He can't stay his own execution, so if he does something against town consensus, he better have good reason, or he is going to be on the block tout suite - faster than if he were a lower-profile individual doing the same thing. And if we put someone suspicious in there, we will know that trusting his actions is not a good idea. We need someone to campaign for voter turnout here - electing a Guv with only three(ish) votes is Not Good!
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 10:05:39 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 10:05:39 GMT -5
<snip> We need someone to campaign for voter turnout here - electing a Guv with only three(ish) votes is Not Good! For the first Guv, I can't see that it matters.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 10:15:58 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 16, 2007 10:15:58 GMT -5
<snip> We need someone to campaign for voter turnout here - electing a Guv with only three(ish) votes is Not Good! For the first Guv, I can't see that it matters. Agreed. The scum/others can potentially exploit anything we do in our first election. For all we know, all three votes on the top candidate are currently from scum/others (hypothetical ppl, hypothetical) and they're now two one-off votes away from placing a Manchurian candidate. If we try and rally consensus between only a few top contenders, there is still plenty of room for one of the choices to be an anti-town weapon in disguise. If we hem and haw for too long, we risk a late vote or two just at the deadline tipping the election in an anti-town manner. There be dragons on all sides, but we're all going in the water with them one way or another.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 10:16:50 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 16, 2007 10:16:50 GMT -5
Well, I suppose it won't have a huge impact one way or the other, it's just a shot in the dark on Day One. But why should people be refraining from voting? Since, as you say, it's probably not a big deal.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 10:54:27 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 10:54:27 GMT -5
Well, I suppose it won't have a huge impact one way or the other, it's just a shot in the dark on Day One. But why should people be refraining from voting? Since, as you say, it's probably not a big deal. I'm not saying they should refrain from voting. I'm saying it doesn't matter who they vote for. Of course they should vote, and I'll find suspicious anybody who doesn't, even if qualified with an "I want to see what everybody else thinks first."
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:02:11 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Nov 16, 2007 11:02:11 GMT -5
One good thing about having a Guv'nuhr is that that player is definitely out in the open. We can monitor their actions (the 6 hours decision, the hammering of one candidate over the other) . I doubt very much that it's a position the scum want. Anyway, we do have a (so far) perennial scum among us whose action I'd like to watch. So: Rugger for Guv'nuhrship! (btw, what was the ruling on the use of "Rugger" to refer to you?)
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:08:38 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 16, 2007 11:08:38 GMT -5
Wow, so that's the Roosh I keep hearing about. Is she always like that, or is that an extra-caffeinated version? As I see it the Governer fulfils three roles. 1. A Lynch cannot go ahead without a governer. 2. In the case of a majority being reached on a candidate, then the governer can decide whether to grant a stay of execution or authorise an immediate lynch. 3. The governer makes the choice between 2 candidates who are tied or else says "no lynch". Answers1. This is not going to occur unless the town keeps prevaricating 2. Considering the difficulty in getting a full majority vote on someone, I think those looking to drop the hammer can wait until I am online again. 3. A Mason role would be more useful here, but even they are not going to be able to discern the difference between colonist, another pro-town role and a replicant. This is the only situation where the side of the Governer will matter, and the longer the gane goes on the more important it will be. Do you perhaps mean "procrastinating"? I don't see how the Colony lying prevents the election of the Governor. You and a couple others use the term "hammer". What are you refering to? Also, what is EoS? Same as FoS? I never like that mechanism, just publish a list of who you are suspicious of. No reason to formalize it. Also, you mention the danger of lynching a power role who happens to occupy the Governor's office as a reason against auto-lynching the Governor. Power roles don't want to be Governor, no matter what. Either the Replicants kill them just for being Governor (didn't matter how well you hid your role), or the Colony forces you to role-claim (because you're still alive). It's a quandary to be avoided. There's no way I'm voting for someone as Governor who wants the position. Although it seems unlikely a Replicant would want the office so early in the game, it may be worthwhile risk. Saying that, I should probably volunteer myself, so others will stop voting for me. But then some would vote for me out of spite anyway. And, my vote for Governor goes to HazelNutCoffeefor low participation. At least, I haven't noticed her around much yet. On preview: Idle Thoughts, what keeps adding the annoying "{=}{/=}" to the end of signatures?
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:09:19 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 16, 2007 11:09:19 GMT -5
I'm not saying they should refrain from voting. I'm saying it doesn't matter who they vote for. Of course they should vote, and I'll find suspicious anybody who doesn't, even if qualified with an "I want to see what everybody else thinks first." OK, fair enough. With you there.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:15:08 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 11:15:08 GMT -5
I am entirely unconcerned about a target on my ass. It's pretty much always there anyway--I don't play in a way that makes me a lot of friends. NAF, here's the problem with your response--I didn't really spectate too much on the other games, but Kyrie never struck me as a heavy analysis posting scum--and for that matter, he lasted until it was three-man mafia. This is not a ringing endorsement of your plan. I like to think that Kyrie made it to the end because we worked REALLY hard to make sure he stayed alive at all costs. I could be wrong. The third option for those scum is this: post a few small insights and mostly act cautious, like most of the players currently are. In this case we find scum the old fashioned way. The plan is not perfect, I just think it is better then our previous methods. Do you think that randomly killing a townie is a better way to go? Do you REALLY believe that we are going to be able to read someone accuratly on Day1 or 2? The method isn't intended to catch scum immediatly, it is intended to expose scum in the long run. We play to endgame, not for short victories. The other thing is this--how do you propose to separate scum posting fluff to avoid your rule from people who post a little fluff now and again anyway? Getting out of the "bottom three posters" is never much more than a matter of a few posts, for the first couple of days. Like I said before, town should be doing scummy shit. If you are town and posting 10% fluff or more, knock it the fuck off. It's scummy and you are confusing the rest of us. [/quote] The other thing is this: I almost NEVER see a scum get caught before day 4 or 5, except for that glorious first werewolf game on the Dope back in the day. See my above point about this not being intended to catch scum right away. And note, the last time I "missed the point" of your arguements, I was right, Sekhamite. =P Maybe you don't wanna be pointing that out? Right, but for the wrong reasons. Not much of a victory so don't gloat. You aren't dumb Z, try reading these ideas again without bias against me then come back and tell me what you think.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:15:34 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 16, 2007 11:15:34 GMT -5
OFFICIAL GUBERNATORIAL VOTE COUNT, 16 NOVEMBER - 11:17AM EST
Pleonast (3) - Santo Rugger, zeriel, hockeymonkey Santo Rugger (3) - Kat, Death by Irony, diggitcamara NAF1138 (2) - Roosh, kassia Diomedes (1) - sinjin zeriel (1) - Parzival kat (1) - drainbead Roosh (1) - Cookies Parzival (1) - episodeofblonde HazelNutCoffee (1) - Pleonast
14 votes have been cast, so as long as no one unvotes without revoting this election is valid. Whoever has the most votes at 5:00PM will be the first new Governor of New Canaan.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:17:15 GMT -5
Post by Hal Briston on Nov 16, 2007 11:17:15 GMT -5
Ok, I'm sneaking away from my "getting the house ready for my daughter's birthday party" duties for a bit, just so this thread doesn't get away from me.
I started reading through this last night, amazed at A) how scummy NAF's plan is, and B) that no one had called him out on it. Now that I'm caught up, I see that Roosh made note. I'm all for proposing new ideas, but geez, when it's pointed out that you're almost certainly going to catch town instead of scum that way, a response like "that's ok, we usually lynch town the first few days anyway" is not a reasonable answer. It's one of the scummiest things I've ever heard a player come up with.
Now then, I've just gone through the rules, and didn't see anything stating that lynch votes could only be made once a Governor is elected, so I'm going to go ahead and: Vote NAF.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:17:18 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 16, 2007 11:17:18 GMT -5
You and a couple others use the term "hammer". What are you refering to? Also, what is EoS? Same as FoS? I never like that mechanism, just publish a list of who you are suspicious of. No reason to formalize it. To hammer: To be the last vote in a majority lynching. From the Firefly game, where reaching a majority lynch meant an automatic lynch. Santo Rugger did this several days in a row. EoS = Eyebrow of suspicion. Not quite as dramatic as an FoS.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:17:35 GMT -5
Post by Yattara on Nov 16, 2007 11:17:35 GMT -5
What's wrong with watching what other people think? It's sometimes to be preferred above just jumping in without noticing the dragons. NAF, I'm not out of town, but I do have class on Fridays, so my time online is rather limited on those days. I don't like the 'Guv=auto-lynched'-plan, for the reasons which have been stated. Bad for the player's morale and besides, the scum can set it up so that there's a guaranteed town-kill each Day. Though removing the automatic kill-side of the job does help. Vote: Parzival, since he's number 18 on the player-list.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:22:57 GMT -5
Post by diggitcamara on Nov 16, 2007 11:22:57 GMT -5
I am entirely unconcerned about a target on my ass. It's pretty much always there anyway--I don't play in a way that makes me a lot of friends. NAF, here's the problem with your response--I didn't really spectate too much on the other games, but Kyrie never struck me as a heavy analysis posting scum--and for that matter, he lasted until it was three-man mafia. This is not a ringing endorsement of your plan. I like to think that Kyrie made it to the end because we worked REALLY hard to make sure he stayed alive at all costs. I could be wrong. (snip) Nope. He made it to the end because I didn't strike against him, even though I had him on my "definite scum" list. (aka: boneheaded move). (I'd like to apologize to storyteller for that. Again)
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:25:49 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 11:25:49 GMT -5
What's wrong with watching what other people think? It's sometimes to be preferred above just jumping in without noticing the dragons.<snip> Absolutely nothing. However, watching and waiting to the point of not formally documenting your thoughts is, IMHO, anti town. <snip> Rugger for Guv'nuhrship![/color] (btw, what was the ruling on the use of "Rugger" to refer to you?)[/quote] You know the saying, you can call me whatever you want... Rugger, Santo, Pygmy... just don't call me late for dinner!
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:25:51 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 16, 2007 11:25:51 GMT -5
Looking through the players and wondering who to elect as Guv'nor.
Personally, I want someone in the role who has a better than odds chance of telling the difference between scum and town in the case of two people on the block because that is the situation that is most likely to occur in this game for the Guv'Nor to deal with.
vote CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:28:10 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 11:28:10 GMT -5
<snip> And, my vote for Governor goes to [colorOrange] HazelNutCoffee[/color] for low participation. At least, I haven't noticed her around much yet. <snip>[/quote] Pleo, I really don't know what's going on in your head, but can you explain to me why you'd want a Guv that, by your observation, isn't around much? That's just ludicrous.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:28:39 GMT -5
Post by Yattara on Nov 16, 2007 11:28:39 GMT -5
What's wrong with watching what other people think? It's sometimes to be preferred above just jumping in without noticing the dragons.<snip> Absolutely nothing. However, watching and waiting to the point of not formally documenting your thoughts is, IMHO, anti town. I can live with that. I was thinking more from the standpoint that sometimes it's beneficial to read other people's thoughts while forming your own. I am not certainly not advocating not thinking at all.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:29:28 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 11:29:28 GMT -5
Ok, I'm sneaking away from my "getting the house ready for my daughter's birthday party" duties for a bit, just so this thread doesn't get away from me. I started reading through this last night, amazed at A) how scummy NAF's plan is, and B) that no one had called him out on it. Now that I'm caught up, I see that Roosh made note. I'm all for proposing new ideas, but geez, when it's pointed out that you're almost certainly going to catch town instead of scum that way, a response like "that's ok, we usually lynch town the first few days anyway" is not a reasonable answer. It's one of the scummiest things I've ever heard a player come up with. Now then, I've just gone through the rules, and didn't see anything stating that lynch votes could only be made once a Governor is elected, so I'm going to go ahead and: Vote NAF. Good for you Hal. At least I understand your objections. I had the same thought, but frankly I can't think of a better way to decide a vote on the first two Days. If you have a better idea let me know. This is an attempt to move away from our old methods which A) have not been working and B) have more often then not been hurting the town. Is this not better then just random lynching? With that, I am going to vote zuma for Gov.he hasn't posted to the game once. I am still not certain about what to do with the Gov. role, maybe putting an absent player in office will light a fire under their ass.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:33:12 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 16, 2007 11:33:12 GMT -5
Ok, I'm sneaking away from my "getting the house ready for my daughter's birthday party" duties for a bit, just so this thread doesn't get away from me. I started reading through this last night, amazed at A) how scummy NAF's plan is, and B) that no one had called him out on it. Now that I'm caught up, I see that Roosh made note. I'm all for proposing new ideas, but geez, when it's pointed out that you're almost certainly going to catch town instead of scum that way, a response like "that's ok, we usually lynch town the first few days anyway" is not a reasonable answer. It's one of the scummiest things I've ever heard a player come up with. Now then, I've just gone through the rules, and didn't see anything stating that lynch votes could only be made once a Governor is elected, so I'm going to go ahead and: Vote NAF. As Day 1 is a little early for me to be throwing the word "scum" at people, I did point out that I had false-positive issues with NAF's proposal, and I voiced them.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:38:43 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 16, 2007 11:38:43 GMT -5
I really don't think voting for people who haven't even showed up yet is the best way to work this new Guv mechanic.
It's looking like we have a tie for the Guv'ship. What happens then? Another 24hrs of voting?
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:40:47 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 11:40:47 GMT -5
<snip> With that, I am going to [colorOrange]vote zuma for Gov. [/color] he hasn't posted to the game once. I am still not certain about what to do with the Gov. role, maybe putting an absent player in office will light a fire under their ass.[/quote] Where's the 24 point font? HOW THE HELL DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE?!?!
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:43:20 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 16, 2007 11:43:20 GMT -5
I really don't think voting for people who haven't even showed up yet is the best way to work this new Guv mechanic. It's looking like we have a tie for the Guv'ship. What happens then? Another 24hrs of voting? Voting ends at 5pm EST or 10pm GMT. We still have just over five hours left to pick someone to be our new Guv'nor. The rest of you can work it out for yourselves
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:46:24 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 11:46:24 GMT -5
<snip> With that, I am going to [colorOrange]vote zuma for Gov. [/color] he hasn't posted to the game once. I am still not certain about what to do with the Gov. role, maybe putting an absent player in office will light a fire under their ass.[/quote] Where's the 24 point font? HOW THE HELL DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE?!?![/quote] To my thinking it either makes sure that they know they need to be around when it comes to vote time OR gets story to sub them out. How do you propose we pick a gubanatorial candidate? You picked Pleo with the "put your money where your mouth is" vote. How is this worse?
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:47:28 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 11:47:28 GMT -5
Story could you get rid of the double quote in my last post?
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:51:33 GMT -5
Post by Zeriel on Nov 16, 2007 11:51:33 GMT -5
To be perfectly honest, the only way I can see the governor being even neutrally town is if we manage to elect a self-protecting doctor, or something similar. The scum can WIFOM all day with whether or not to kill a townie governor, and we're all likely to get paranoid.
Personally, I think my reaction is leaning more and more to "vote the governor using whatever method, and plan to execute the governor if he stays executions without an immediate good reason."--since the stay of execution power is the best way for the scum to metagame it--tiebreaker votes don't seem to me to really matter as much, because this just puts them in one specific pre-selected hand instead of the tiebreaker being whoever happens to vote last (which is also easily gamed).
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:52:33 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 16, 2007 11:52:33 GMT -5
Story could you get rid of the double quote in my last post? You got it.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 11:57:10 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 11:57:10 GMT -5
<snip> To my thinking it either makes sure that they know they need to be around when it comes to vote time OR gets story to sub them out. How do you propose we pick a gubanatorial candidate? You picked Pleo with the "put your money where your mouth is" vote. How is this worse? What if they can't be around at "vote time", which, if a majority is reached, could happen at any point during the Day? What makes you think story would sub them out simply for not being available during a specific six hour period? I'm not saying the reason for my vote is the best one, but I'm saying that yours is a bad one. The Guv mechanic has a potential for being pro town. By ensuring that somebody is in the office who isn't around much, that mechanic is eliminated.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:00:16 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 16, 2007 12:00:16 GMT -5
Pleo, I really don't know what's going on in your head, but can you explain to me why you'd want a Guv that, by your observation, isn't around much? That's just ludicrous. The Governor is an anti-Colony game mechanic, more-so at end game, but a non-negligible amount even on Day One. A limited-playing Governor isn't any more anti-Town than a Governor who posts a lot. Actually, do we really want an active player as Governor? Take me for instance--I'm likely to be in the thick of any fray, just because of my personality and posting style. You really want me to make life-and-death decision? A Colonist Governor, who happens to post little, won't do any worse than any other Colonist, and is more likely to be unbiased. A Replicant Governor will screw us over no matter how much they post.
|
|