|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:06:32 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 16, 2007 12:06:32 GMT -5
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). Huh? If I'm Governor, I'm going to stay every execution. More time to talk means more time for a Replicant to make a mistake. Scum want us to rush executions; it's so much easier make an emotion-filled, logic-lacking case against someone if there's no time for cooler heads to think about it. And, for similar reasons, I'll never choose the No Electrocution option--the Colony needs to fry people to get information.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:06:54 GMT -5
Post by Zeriel on Nov 16, 2007 12:06:54 GMT -5
NAF, please don't accuse me of prior-game bias. If I hate you for anything, it's getting hung with the name "top dog" when I subbed into Firefly. =P
I'm not as convinced as Hal apparently is that you're scummy--I'm willing to believe you're misguided. Yes, in prior games we voted haphazardly and tended to lynch townies in the first few days. With your strategy, we're acting in a semi-calculated manner that's easy to avoid and will almost certainly tend to lynch townies in the first few days. I don't really see how making the scum post more (assuming they're even lurking as a strategy) is likely to make them reveal more--none of the big slips from Firefly revolved around people posting too much, unless you want to blame Cookie's "scum investigator" slip on that.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:07:58 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Nov 16, 2007 12:07:58 GMT -5
I'm going to try to break the tie now.
I'm somewhat suspicious of Pleonast out of the two current vote leaders, to the point where I don't want him in a position of power right now. Seeing as it seems that we're damned if we do and damned if we don't, I'm going to unvote Kat and vote Rugger for Guv. Even if the Governor is inherently an anti-town position (which I'm not sure if it is, provided we put the right person up for the job), the best we can do is put someone up there who we think will not stay an execution unless it's warranted. I believe that of the two vote leaders, Rugger is more likely to do a better job of it.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:13:09 GMT -5
Post by sinjin on Nov 16, 2007 12:13:09 GMT -5
story: what happens if we have a tie for Guv at the end of the 24 hour period?
I think that if we have a tie, we automagically go into Guv election over-time and waste 24 hours of our 5 day-Day. I will be back in about 45 minutes (got to go to work, hehehehe) and move my vote off Dio, since he hasn't shown up yet, and vote for one of the top-votees. Just can't decide which yet.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:15:51 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 16, 2007 12:15:51 GMT -5
Santo Rugger (4) - Kat, Death by Irony, diggitcamara, drainbead Pleonast (3) - Santo Rugger, zeriel, hockeymonkey NAF1138 (2) - Roosh, kassia Parzival (2) - episodeofblonde. Yattara Diomedes (1) - sinjin zeriel (1) - Parzival Roosh (1) - CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookies HazelNutCoffee (1) - Pleonast zuma (1) - NAF1138 CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (1) - CatinaSuit
17 players have voted. The election period will end in approximately 4 hours and 45 minutes.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:17:30 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Nov 16, 2007 12:17:30 GMT -5
story: what happens if we have a tie for Guv at the end of the 24 hour period?I think that if we have a tie, we automagically go into Guv election over-time and waste 24 hours of our 5 day-Day. I will be back in about 45 minutes (got to go to work, hehehehe) and move my vote off Dio, since he hasn't shown up yet, and vote for one of the top-votees. Just can't decide which yet. You do go into the election overtime if there is a tie after 24 hours; you can ameliorate this by achieving a 13 vote majority (which ends the election period instantly at any time) on any candidate. So if you're tied at 5:00PM today, but by 6:10PM today somebody has 13 votes, the lynch period begins at 6:10. Make sense?
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:22:28 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 12:22:28 GMT -5
NAF, please don't accuse me of prior-game bias. If I hate you for anything, it's getting hung with the name "top dog" when I subbed into Firefly. =P I'm not as convinced as Hal apparently is that you're scummy--I'm willing to believe you're misguided. Yes, in prior games we voted haphazardly and tended to lynch townies in the first few days. With your strategy, we're acting in a semi-calculated manner that's easy to avoid and will almost certainly tend to lynch townies in the first few days. I don't really see how making the scum post more (assuming they're even lurking as a strategy) is likely to make them reveal more--none of the big slips from Firefly revolved around people posting too much, unless you want to blame Cookie's "scum investigator" slip on that. Sorry, I wasn't intending to imply prior game bias (although somewhere deep down I may have felt that) I was referring to my observation that you tend to read everything posted with the bias that it is scum posting. You aren't the only one who does this, not by a long shot, and it isn't always a bad thing...but it isn't always a good thing. I am not saying we vote with my system en masse. That would probably not be workable. What I am doing is attempting to create a theory, explain my voting, and generate discussion all at the same time. My hope was that we wouldn't get hung up on the specifics of how I am individually chosing to cast my votes, but that everyone would examine how they are casting their votes, and we could talk about it a bit. I think it is a usefull discussion to have. It will create more transperancy then just saying "random.org commands me" or whatnot. (which frankly is just as good a method of getting information, but has always felt like a bit of a cop out to me.) I have no problem talking about the details of my system if that is what everyone wants, but I think that focusing on details right now is more or less missing the point. In fact, I thnink talking about my voting system instead of the Gov. race is probably a bad idea. We will have plenty of time to rake me over the coals once we have a Governor.
|
|
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 12:31:18 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 12:31:18 GMT -5
It's not about how much they post. It's about weather they're here or not when the hammer drops, or when a tie is incurred. As I said in my previous post, the role has -potential- for being pro town. I completely disagree that the Guv should be somebody who pops in only a couple times a week.
Again, I argue that at this point in the game, it doesn't matter much. However, I'd at least like whoever it is to be a relatively active player. Furthermore, at this point in the game, I don't know -who- should be making life and death decisions. But, I do want them around to be able to make, and be held accountable for, said decisions.
While I agree that a Replicant Guv can screw us over, it will be soon caught and corrected. -Especially- at this point in the game.
|
|
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 12:32:32 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Nov 16, 2007 12:32:32 GMT -5
Sorry, my above post is in response to this: 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.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:40:33 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 16, 2007 12:40:33 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 CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookiesAw shucks...
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 12:50:25 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Nov 16, 2007 12:50:25 GMT -5
A couple of things.
Firstly I believe Hal was correct in his assertion that we are able to vote for execution now, if we so wish. We could (in theory) keep the Gubernatorial ballot going until 10 minutes before Sunset and conduct a debate on executions instead. If we want.
Secondly, I appreciated Santo Rugger's nomination because it pouts Pleonast into the position of having to face the consequences of his suggested policy first.
Since he has shifted his support to the plan as modified by Atarus I'm slightly less worried. However, he also nominates inactive people for Governor. People who aren't here much to explain and defend themselves, and thus might be deemed easy shots for lynching.
Thus Pleo's early actions, when considered together, make my scumdar itch.
Thirdly, I wasn't happy with NAF's "I'll vote for the lowest postcount. Then after the first couple of days, I'll look for people who padded their postcount with fluff."
The likely consequence of people faced with elimination unless they post more is additional fluff posts. I for one refrain from "me too" posts because I consider them fluffy. Your policy made me think of increasing the number of such posts just to avoid getting lynched.
Since your policy in the first two days will have the effect of driving people into the very behaviour you intend to target in later days, I don't think it works very well. Even expanded from "the lowest" to "one of the last three."
I see these two as pointers of suspicion, nothing more. They'll go into my notebook for later...
Right now I'm pondering my gubernatorial vote - I have four hours unless everyone rushes to get behind one candidate. And I need to eat something. At this moment the d12/d20 combo points unequivocally at candidate number 15.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:00:33 GMT -5
Post by Zeriel on Nov 16, 2007 13:00:33 GMT -5
NAF, I understand that you're trying to generate discussion about how town votes. In my own way, so am I--I think there has to be a better system than what you propose because your system is trivially gamed. Maybe if you based your post counts on picking a random time midday to sample post counts? But then you'd have to account for schedules differing if you came in on some group's high point but prior to another time zone logging in.
You're not helping your case by saying you realize your strategy is equivalently worthless as "random.org" voting, at this late stage--the time and place to not get bogged down in discussion of your voting system would have been saying earlier: "I'm choosing this system because it is semi-random and tests for a trait I find scummy. If you don't like it, find your own method and publish it, since mine is arguably no worse than randomly voting." You've been defending it too much for you to credibly say "no we should concentrate on the gov vote."
Especially since, as far as I can tell, in early game the gov is a neutral role except in the case of a tiebreaker, and any scum could be the tiebreaker just as easily by not voting until last, like happened in Firefly. Stays of execution don't prevent a lynch, it seems, and if we have a governor cast a tiebreaking vote that kills town, well, that's data isn't it?
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:03:12 GMT -5
Post by Zeriel on Nov 16, 2007 13:03:12 GMT -5
I have to wonder what the hell Pleonast is talking about up top of this page about a "no electrocution" option in the context of governor powers, since from my reading of the rules the governor can't actually stop an execution, just extend the day by up to 24hours (6+18) after a majority hammer vote.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:09:12 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 16, 2007 13:09:12 GMT -5
At this moment the d12/d20 combo points unequivocally at candidate number 15. Using "random" as your reason for voting for someone (either Governor or Chair) is just as worthless as using the lowest post count. It's an attempt at denying personal accountability. "The dice made me do it" (or any mechanical procedure) does not help other Colonists decide if you're acting in the interest of the Colony or the Replicants. Us Colonists need to see the motivations of others. That's the most reliable way us vanilla Colonists have to separate the wheat from the chaff. These are the players who've used "random" as an excuse to vote for someone: Parzival, Cookies, Kat, kassia, Yattara. (drainbead original randomed someone, but retracted it an made a reasoned vote.) I ask all these players to reconsider their mechanical vote and place a vote based on a reason. You know, so us information-starved Colonists have something to work with? On preview: zeriel, read the Lynching section of the Basic Rules again.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:24:46 GMT -5
Post by episodeofblonde on Nov 16, 2007 13:24:46 GMT -5
I agree that it is important for people to post their motivations, understandably thin though they are at this early stage. I also think any 'mechanical' system of voting either for Guv or electrocution s bound to suffer from serious problems - being easily gamed or simply not being reliable for scum-hunting. But we can talk about that after the Guv has taken office. And I think we should not waste time with a tie if at all possible. Whilst I am still interested to see what Parzival would do with the Guv job, I want to stick to my principles here, and pick someone that I am in agreement with on how to use the job as a pro-Town mechanic. So, if he goes against what he has said so far, his hypocrisy will be noted. He does know how to hammer : unvote Parzival for Guvvote Santo Rugger
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:34:22 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 13:34:22 GMT -5
You're not helping your case by saying you realize your strategy is equivalently worthless as "random.org" voting, at this late stage--the time and place to not get bogged down in discussion of your voting system would have been saying earlier: "I'm choosing this system because it is semi-random and tests for a trait I find scummy. If you don't like it, find your own method and publish it, since mine is arguably no worse than randomly voting." You've been defending it too much for you to credibly say "no we should concentrate on the gov vote." Well this was roughly my intention (go back and re read my opening posts). But when someone says something that I find to be a logical error while they are disecting my own thoughts, I have a hard time not responding. I screwed my approach up a bit. But I am trying to get back on track now. ;D
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:47:58 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 16, 2007 13:47:58 GMT -5
My current vote for Guv was arrived at in a random fashion precisely because I have no idea what any of the rest of your motivations may or may not be behind your votes (or lack thereof). We have some who say they're voting for low-posters/lurkers, or they're voting for suspicious players, or for players who have proposed things such that they will be the guinea pigs in their own proposals. Voting for a lynch is cut and dry. You either want to gon on record as contributing towards someone's lynch or not. But this Guv stuff is a whole different thing, and the motivations will be all over the place.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:51:35 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 16, 2007 13:51:35 GMT -5
NETA that some are also saying they are selecting Guv candidates for leadership skills or fair-mindedness, or other character traits that you hope will be used in a pro-town manner, in case anyone tries to accuse me of anything by not including a reference to them.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 13:56:26 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 16, 2007 13:56:26 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 CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookiesAw shucks... I nearly added: "and have the balls to vote no Lynch if they think that both the people are town." Personally, I am getting really scummy vibes from NAF and Pleonast. I also think zeriel has made at least one anti-town slip from what he has said already. Of the main candidates remaining, I feel most comfortable with the following person. unvote CometotheDarkSideWeHaveCookies
vote Santo RuggerBy the way, I do not share the feeling that the Guv'nor has to be an anti-town role. I believe it can work very well for the town if needs be. Sorry Santo Rugger, the poison chalice is all yours.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:00:51 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 16, 2007 14:00:51 GMT -5
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). Huh? If I'm Governor, I'm going to stay every execution. More time to talk means more time for a Replicant to make a mistake. Scum want us to rush executions; it's so much easier make an emotion-filled, logic-lacking case against someone if there's no time for cooler heads to think about it. And, for similar reasons, I'll never choose the No Electrocution option--the Colony needs to fry people to get information. Now see this is a problem. The only way the Guv/nor is going to grant a stay of execution, is if over half the town decide that someone is scummy enough for them to be voted for. Consensus of half the town. Are you kidding? That was forced in Firefly and only occured in the other games when the person was a bona fide scum. I think you are beginning to misrepresent the role and impact of the Guv'nor on this game. And not in a good way.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:04:57 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 14:04:57 GMT -5
I also think zeriel has made at least one anti-town slip from what he has said already. Saying this without saying what you think the slip was, is in no way helpful to the town.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:05:50 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 14:05:50 GMT -5
DASH IT ALL!
That quote line from cookies shouldn't be there. It is Cat who said that.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:06:03 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Nov 16, 2007 14:06:03 GMT -5
That's 6 votes for Santo now?
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:11:24 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 16, 2007 14:11:24 GMT -5
DASH IT ALL! That quote line from cookies shouldn't be there. It is Cat who said that. NAF: Calm down, will you. Relax, its only a game, stop rooshing around I am going back over zeriel's posts to see if there is anything else which confirms my thoughts. There is still plenty of time in this Day to bring forward ideas and arguments. I have no desire to distract from the Guv'nor voting and so you will probably get it tomorrow. Like I said "I think it is a slip". Other people will disagree and I would like to present something more concrete and not get any arguments I may produce now ignored or run over.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:14:12 GMT -5
Post by Pleonast on Nov 16, 2007 14:14:12 GMT -5
Huh? If I'm Governor, I'm going to stay every execution. More time to talk means more time for a Replicant to make a mistake. Scum want us to rush executions; it's so much easier make an emotion-filled, logic-lacking case against someone if there's no time for cooler heads to think about it. And, for similar reasons, I'll never choose the No Electrocution option--the Colony needs to fry people to get information. Now see this is a problem. The only way the Guv/nor is going to grant a stay of execution, is if over half the town decide that someone is scummy enough for them to be voted for. Consensus of half the town. Are you kidding? That was forced in Firefly and only occured in the other games when the person was a bona fide scum. I think you are beginning to misrepresent the role and impact of the Guv'nor on this game. And not in a good way. I didn't follow the Firefly game, so you'll have to describe in more detail why you think cutting off discussion is pro-Colony.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:15:37 GMT -5
Post by Zeriel on Nov 16, 2007 14:15:37 GMT -5
I'd be interested to know what it is I said that's anti-town as well.
Pleonast: thanks for pointing it out--I think we're having a disagreement of definition, since the only time the governor can say no-lynch is when there is a tie, which is again fundamentally the same power as any random hoser who waited to vote until last in Firefly had.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:19:26 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Nov 16, 2007 14:19:26 GMT -5
At this moment the d12/d20 combo points unequivocally at candidate number 15. Using "random" as your reason for voting for someone (either Governor or Chair) is just as worthless as using the lowest post count. It's an attempt at denying personal accountability. "The dice made me do it" (or any mechanical procedure) does not help other Colonists decide if you're acting in the interest of the Colony or the Replicants. Firstly I will not be voting randomly in electrocution ballots. (Let's call the victime "the condemned" eh? It's nice and generic enough that it can be applied to any game.) Mostly for the reasons you advance. For the Gubernatorial ballot, however, the aim is to deny the post to the Replicants. Since the majority of players are not replicants, random votes serve just as well. However, I'd rather vote for a reason, so I gave myself a break from the screen to think. Now I see there's been a shift in votes towards SR, but I'm not sure I want him in the chair. (Either of them.) Now I've come back, who shall be The Governator? My first reasoned candidate was DarkCookies, because she has the demonstrated skill to read posts and make correct deductions. (The last Day of M5 was a seriously impressive performance, and DarkCookies deserves several accolades for that.) I doubt that she has the time and inclination to do that once a week for the foreseeable future though. My second would be for Pleonast. His advocacy first for the "Auto-lynch the Governor" plan, and secondly for "put a suspicious candidate in" plan followed by voting for someone who hasn't been around for that reason means I want him where I can see him. Additionally, he made some promises about policies if elected. I'm fine with those policies. By all means feel free to implement them if elected. Vote Pleonast. @ CatinaSuit : The Colony might be making a mistake, and the extra six hours gives us a chance to reconsider. If at the end of that time the colony still wants an execution, they get what they want. He can't stop the execution, just delay it a short while. And if you recall, the person who made a habit of cutting off discussion was the leader of the Alliance. Extension of debate might well be a pro-Colony action.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:20:02 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 14:20:02 GMT -5
DASH IT ALL! That quote line from cookies shouldn't be there. It is Cat who said that. NAF: Calm down, will you. Relax, its only a game, stop rooshing around Hee! I am going to have to use smiley's more often I guess.
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:40:46 GMT -5
Post by CatInASuit on Nov 16, 2007 14:40:46 GMT -5
I didn't follow the Firefly game, so you'll have to describe in more detail why you think cutting off discussion is pro-Colony. That was not the point I was making. The Guv'nor only extends discussion when a majority of people have voted for a single person. This has only occured in plurality voting Mafia Games when the person being lynched was an outed scum. Given that this game also has plurality voting as an end of day condition, I would like to know when this situation is going to occur. Being honest, I would be very surprised if this situation occurs in this game for a non-confirmed scum. In other words, extending discussion does not mean as much if the only situation it is likely to occur in is when we vote to lynch a known scum. By all means, extending the day gives the scum another 18 hours to slip up in, however I don't remember any scum giving themselves away during any of the times where we have had a known lynch going on in the other games. Not to mention that 18 hours is not long enough to force the scum to post during that time, let alone provide extra clues. So are you going to say that everyone has to post in that 18 hours or else?
|
|
|
Day One
Nov 16, 2007 14:55:31 GMT -5
Post by NAF1138 on Nov 16, 2007 14:55:31 GMT -5
By all means, extending the day gives the scum another 18 hours to slip up in, however I don't remember any scum giving themselves away during any of the times where we have had a known lynch going on in the other games. Not to mention that 18 hours is not long enough to force the scum to post during that time, let alone provide extra clues. So are you going to say that everyone has to post in that 18 hours or else? This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how finding scum slips works. It isn't about finding that one magical slip, it is about getting the scum to talk enough that you can start to see the pattern and consistency (or rather inconsistency I suppose) in their slips.
|
|