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 One
Jul 26, 2007 20:34:38 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jul 26, 2007 20:34:38 GMT -5
Still about one and a half days before Day One ends. Already? Shoot fire! I better get crackin'! I don't have any good reasons to vote for anyone right now, so just to stimulate some conversation vote dnooman. I will change this, maybe a couple of times in the next 36 hours.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 20:41:13 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Jul 26, 2007 20:41:13 GMT -5
Hmm, voted for because of a perceived light-on posting history. Bit harsh, but meh what ya going to do. I guess it is better than coping a vote just because. I will freely admit I have no suspicions at this stage, mainly because I honestly don't believe there has been a massive lot of substance in the thread to date. There seems to be an awful lot of chatter/white noise about colours, past games, random voting, etc etc. And I just cannot see how that sort of chatter produces anything that can be useful in interpreting who are the psychos. So when I did see a couple of posts - e.g. Blaster Master (or whatever name you're using at the moment ) and Storyteller which I thought were constructive I commented on them. I figured an agree and an agree with amplification post would be more useful than no contribution at all. (And by default adopting the lurker tag) Certainly there are no votes that have been cast to date that I've seen any real basis for, I.e. - Me for not posting enough, Kat as a preemptive semi-joke vote, Dotchan & Malacandra just as random throw it out there, Hockey Monkey for an annoying colour, and Roosh also possible randomly. When someone shows up and says I am voting for X because of blah blah blah. Then I can analyse that but at the moment there is nothing to base any opinion on. One point I would like to raise is that my perception is that I think some of the old hands here have an inbuilt advantage, in that, you've played with the same people before, multiple times in some cases, so you already have some background read on whether posts from someone are within the normal style of that person. Would anyone care to agree/disagree/comment on that idea? It is obviously an outsider looking in assessment. So until I can get a little something to get my teeth into, i.e. meaningful discussions, I'm sort of sitting back a little and going with the flow, although on the basis of Kats vote I may just have to post more anyway, but then I don't see how to avoid running afoul of it being called "fluff" posts. To be honest I really don't feel comfortable just throwing out strategy posts at the moment. I'll attempt to make this the very last time I mention this* as being my first game of Mafia. And what I think of a strategy may be a well known stupid idea or some such. *
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 20:57:43 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Jul 26, 2007 20:57:43 GMT -5
If everyone will forgive me following up a rather lengthy post with another post, (Wee look at my postcount soar ) Are we going to lynch someone this first day? Do we have too? I understand this issue has been done to death in other games but I think it is one kite that needs to be floated. As far as I am concerned, unless we have some telepathic people playing or someone makes a gaff of gigantic proportions in the next 36 hours a first day lynching is essentially random. Yes? Given the parameters of this game is it worth lynching someone on day 1? As I understand it the probability is we will lynch a Towny, so is it worth that probable loss to give the remaining townies a data point to anaylse for scum tells? Personally I think no, but given people are happy to throw out random votes, I suspect I may be in the minority on this point. [Before anyone points it out, yes I am well aware I have essentially violated my own statement in paragraph 3 above. I did say "sort of", I'm not actually suggesting a strategy just putting something out there for some hopefully meaningful discussion] [Edited purely to correct a silly typo - soar instead of score - I really should use the preview button more often]
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 20:59:22 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 26, 2007 20:59:22 GMT -5
That's what I'm talking about! Beautiful. Paragraphs and everything. One point I would like to raise is that my perception is that I think some of the old hands here have an inbuilt advantage, in that, you've played with the same people before, multiple times in some cases, so you already have some background read on whether posts from someone are within the normal style of that person. Would anyone care to agree/disagree/comment on that idea? It is obviously an outsider looking in assessment. I'm leaning a bit towards the disagree side of commenting on that. The previous games are all still out there. Theoretically, you can read 'em all and see how everyone plays, armed with the knowledge of what their role was at the time, even. Plus, you're blessed with a more objective point of view, not being emotionally invested in the previous games, which may have affected the ability of the other players, who were reading everything in the middle of the game. Of course, that's presuming that you want to put the time and effort into doing that. It was bad enough for me having to try doing that with just the one game that I didn't play in, and I still have only made it up to Day Five of the Pirate game.#nosignature#
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 21:07:05 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 26, 2007 21:07:05 GMT -5
Given the parameters of this game is it worth lynching someone on day 1? As I understand it the probability is we will lynch a Towny, so is it worth that probable loss to give the remaining townies a data point to anaylse for scum tells? Yes, it is. The only 100% verifiable facts we get in the game are the roles of the dead. Once someone is lynched, even a Townie, we can go back and see who said what about him, and compare that information with later Days' event. The lynch may not give us a lot of info by itself, but once it's put into a pattern, that could change. Plus, if we don't lynch anyone on Day One, the same argument can be made about lynching on Day Two, and then Day Three, and then eventually, the scum has nightkilled us all.#nosignature#
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 21:09:35 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Jul 26, 2007 21:09:35 GMT -5
That's what I'm talking about! Beautiful. Paragraphs and everything. Off course there is paragraphs and everything. Sheesh! Even on casual forums and messaging, I can't help myself, I'm very painful with spelling* and grammar. I think I'm the only person in the world who doesn't abbreviate everything when I'm texting. Damn that 14 years of submission writing. * While you may think you see some spelling errors in my posts, words like Colour and Analyse are spelt correctly when you speak the Queens English. ;D #nosignature#
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 21:19:33 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 26, 2007 21:19:33 GMT -5
I think you mean "Of course, there are paragraphs and everything." ;D
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 21:24:47 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Jul 26, 2007 21:24:47 GMT -5
Boy, is that ever embarassing Don't you just love life's little F. You moments.
|
|
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 One
Jul 26, 2007 22:09:09 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jul 26, 2007 22:09:09 GMT -5
I think we are not allowed to edit our posts in any way. I'll resist the temptation to point and laugh 'cause I know I'll mangle a post at some point, but a pop on the hand to greedysmurf for editing.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 22:20:15 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Jul 26, 2007 22:20:15 GMT -5
I'm sure Idle said one of his rules is to allow a five minute edit window for typos, etc. If I'm wrong, I will accept my punishment like a man. [Off I go to search for that rule to avoid Hockeys beating]
|
|
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 One
Jul 26, 2007 22:24:54 GMT -5
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Jul 26, 2007 22:24:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 22:26:20 GMT -5
Post by nesta on Jul 26, 2007 22:26:20 GMT -5
Are we going to lynch someone this first day? Do we have too? I understand this issue has been done to death in other games but I think it is one kite that needs to be floated. I understand the temptation is high to vote no-lynch since the odds seem to support the likelihood of lynching a townie instead of scum on the first day since we have so little information. I think a no-lynch only hurts the town in the long run, though, as has been the general consensus in all the past SDMB games. There are a few situations where a no-lynch is in the town's best interest, but those are few and far between. [Paragraphs inserted for kat ] Most importantly, as kat pointed out, we gain real information with the lynch, instead of the very sketchy information that Day 1 gives us otherwise. Secondly, it really isn't random, since we do have some information to go on, and there is a very real chance we could lynch scum (see SDMB Mafia1 [or Werewolf1]), and if we can pull that off it gives us a very big advantage this early in the game. Thirdly, the threat of lynching is the biggest motivation for the scum to participate at all so as to appear pro-town, and therefore gives us a chance to catch them as being false. If they saw that the town was leaning toward a no-lynch they could just hang back, post fluff posts, and give us even less information. Fourthly, the scum get to kill Tonight regardless if we lynch someone, and giving them a free kill on the first day is giving up the only balancing power we have as a town. I don't fault you for bringing up no-lynch as a possibility, but I would start to suspect anyone who campaigned strongly Today that it would be advantageous, since I don't think it is. [Bah, for some reason the Insert Quote button in the multi-quote feature isn't inserting it.] One point I would like to raise is that my perception is that I think some of the old hands here have an inbuilt advantage, in that, you've played with the same people before, multiple times in some cases, so you already have some background read on whether posts from someone are within the normal style of that person. Would anyone care to agree/disagree/comment on that idea? It is obviously an outsider looking in assessment. I'm leaning a bit towards the disagree side of commenting on that. The previous games are all still out there. Theoretically, you can read 'em all and see how everyone plays, armed with the knowledge of what their role was at the time, even. Plus, you're blessed with a more objective point of view, not being emotionally invested in the previous games, which may have affected the ability of the other players, who were reading everything in the middle of the game. Of course, that's presuming that you want to put the time and effort into doing that. It was bad enough for me having to try doing that with just the one game that I didn't play in, and I still have only made it up to Day Five of the Pirate game. Actually, I agree with Greedy Smurf that those of us who have played with each other have a little bit of an advantage. I’ve found that even though I’ve read all of the SDMB games I have a much better feel for the people I’ve actually played in the games with since I pay much closer attention to individual players when I am participating instead of spectating. Of course, this might also be a little bit of a weakness because as I’ve been trying to find scum in this game so far I keep defaulting to those I’ve played with and comparing them to their previous play styles. I think everyone who has played in these games before should keep this in mind and try to keep track of not just those we’re familiar with, but the new players as well.#nosignature#
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 22:28:02 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Jul 26, 2007 22:28:02 GMT -5
The second is the old editting function. I shorted it to the standard "you only have five minutes to edit your posts before you can't anymore". This is mostly due to the fact that I plan on allowing edits OF SMALL TYPOS, MISTAKES, SPELLINGS, OR CODINGS. But use it quickly (obviously you'll have to because you only have a five minute window) and I will be checking the logs for every edit and making sure nobody is using this sneakily. And that's it! Enjoy. There we go - I was getting worried when I couldn't find it at first. I know editing is discouraged, and I know I should just preview my damn posts but here's hoping this gets me out of a smacking?
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 22:32:29 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 26, 2007 22:32:29 GMT -5
Yeah, but read the Pre Game stuff in this form. I changed my mind on it. But it's okay that you did it... Mal did it earlier and I didn't call him out on it either because it was just to fix typos or add things. Just try not to do it again, that's all.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 22:33:10 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 26, 2007 22:33:10 GMT -5
dotchan (1) - JSexton Malacandra (1) - Blaster Master JSexton (1) - Malacandra drainbead (1) - storyteller0910 GreedySmurf (1) - kat dnooman (1) - Hockey Monkey
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 22:33:57 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 26, 2007 22:33:57 GMT -5
Okay, I've got a substantial post out of Greedy, which makes me happy for now. ( <---See?) I'm not completely happy with his no-lynch suggestion, but I'm satisfied enough to unvote Greedy Smurf. This also forces me to reread the thread again. Boo! So anyway, two more people came to my attention this time. mhaye has posted twice: Most recently about name color, and prior to that, he brought up the "grudges from previous games are bad" issue. That first post included the "Just because Kat was Cult in M5, does not mean that she's a Psychopath in this one. (It doesn't mean she's not, either)." Paranoia loomed here, of course: Is he trying to subtly link me to the Psychos? Paranoia got shut up in a box for now while I try to convince it that he was joking, but mhaye could stand to say something of substance. The other player: Pygmy Rugger, who has posted 14 times, mostly jokes and comments about sigs, avatars, and such. I liked his one post--reply#117--but the last sentence "(Hint, hint, to those of you not posting any actual content. I'm not saying you need to post a lot, or not have any fluff posts, but story and I went, let's hear what you have to say.)" is a bit ironic. Based again on lack of content, vote mhaye. Especially since I know he can put together decent posts, I've seen him do it, but he's not doing it here. Could be lack of time, since he's still in MV...could be something else.#nosignature#
|
|
Gir!
FGM
EVIL Demon Goddess Mod
What? Kat is sweet and innocent!
Posts: 691
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 22:37:22 GMT -5
Post by Gir! on Jul 26, 2007 22:37:22 GMT -5
Hey, Idle Thoughts! Your vote count is off! ;D
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 26, 2007 23:30:19 GMT -5
Post by Greedy Smurf on Jul 26, 2007 23:30:19 GMT -5
Sorry about the edit thing, I [obviously] missed the change of policy. I promise to no longer edit my posts, no matter the size of the stupid typo.
And, just a comment on the no-lynch option, while I'm not 100% convinced lynching on day 1 is a good idea, I do very much take onboard both Kats and Nestas comments about why we should do it, and will mull it over for a bit.
I guess it comes down to a risk v reward evaluation, the rewards I think are: 1. - At least a chance of bagging a psycho, 2. - Psycho's are forced to continue participation in the discussion - thus increased chance of a slip/tell, 3. - 100% concrete confirmation of the lynchees role, (is lynchee even a word?)
The main risk obviously is lynching a towny, or a high probability of same, but also given #2 Reward, you could also include as a risk - continued participation by towny power roles in the discussion - which could potentially give the psychos a tell,
Interesting. I hope no one minds me working this stuff through 'aloud'. Hopefully it might help someone else to see my 'working', or to allow someone to point out any flaws in my thinking.
I'm actually starting to lean towards agreeing with Kat and Nesta now on the 1st up lynching. So who's got the rope?
Only problem now is to figure out who to vote for? That at the moment is definitely a noodle scratcher.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 0:21:25 GMT -5
Post by capybara on Jul 27, 2007 0:21:25 GMT -5
Greedy, you're reminding a lot of me last game, so I understand the working things out as you go thing (I still consider myself a noob). I think your reticence about lynching today is very sane-- I am also very uneasy about it, as I don't feel I have a sure take on anyone, and the chances of lynching a townie this first day with so little information is high. But-- and it took me a while to realize this-- unless some scum really really screws up by sundown, we have NO evidence OF anything at the end of the day-- just a lot of factiness that doesn't indicate anything yet-- a lot of statements, a lot of lies, and impossible to tell the difference. This first FACT that we get is the role from a death. If we don't lynch today, we get one verified death overnight which CERTAINLY will be a townie, and nothing else to go on tomorrow. A death of our choosing, good outcome or bad, is the only clear point that will let us start to draw actual information from all this spouting we're doing. Or else tomorrow we start essentially in the same place. So although you will feel totally uncertain-- maybe even have a conviction that we're lynching an innocent collectively-- and not want to be complicit in an almost certainly bad decision, it has to be done by someone. I myself admittedly tend to vote for the person I'm actually personally most suspicious of at the end of the day, who is frequently not the popular choice and makes me stick out in a "avoided all bandwagons" column-- so be it. Gee, that was longwinded.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 0:52:27 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Jul 27, 2007 0:52:27 GMT -5
dotchan (1) - JSexton Malacandra (1) - Blaster Master JSexton (1) - Malacandra drainbead (1) - storyteller0910 I was going to agree with Kat vote of GreedySmurf actually a few pages back when she first accused him, but now I must say Greedy's done an admirable job of returning and talking. So I see no reason for voting for the guy. My feeling Dotchan and Malacandra are neutral. I don't really think they deserve the votes and i think they're fine. I wouldn't vote for them yet, and so I wont. JSexton and Drainbead.... This is where it gets tricky. JSexton I had initial suspicions of. Mainly his random vote of Dotchan. Since then we've had time to talk and such though. However in the most recent vote count, i still a vote for Dotchan cast by JSexton. If he hasn't found anything else yet to go on, and still feels random is the best, more power to him. However... it just don't sit right with me. I'm gonna wait one more day for JSexton. But he's on my list right now of Eyeballin'Dudes. Drainbead. I remember liking you. And that struck me as suspicous. Early on in teh game, I felt that I can't trust anyone but myself, but for somereason i started to like you. It was because you agreed with me on two points. But I didn't like that feeling. It's like you want me on your side maybe as we're both new to the game? But I remember being leery on you because I disliked your first joke vote for hockeymonkey because of the color of her font. It was a vote that didn't sit well with me, and thats what later made me feel icky of you when you were on my side. It was nice for your defense, but I remembered you were a joke voter initially. -But you retract the vote on Reply #172 whihc is nice. -But then in Reply #173 (I'm sorry, i don't know how to link yet) you state: "And what the hell....vote Blaster Master, since the gray is almost as annoying as the yellow."You go and do it again! When you pulled out the Joke vote for BlastaMasta cuz of HIS colored font. I mean, i got the joke the first time, but again. With a game like this noone really likes suspicious people, and votes are a way of getting suspicion on people. It almost seems like a way to fish for votes, to see if anyone "bites" proverbially speaking, ya know? Most uncool, DrainBead.... Most uncool. Your MadTheSwine line was also unneeded i felt. Like Kat/MtS had their lil joke things (from reading the old posts) and so i knew what that was about but then you come in and cast suspicion on MtS. Again, it goes with your previous behavior... you kinda like just pointing at someone, and seeing if anything bites it seems. I've only been noticing this, because again you'd been defending me and i remember disliking your behavior. It's like... in the middle of a gunfight with someone else, two dudes are facing each other. And then you just show up and pull your own taunts out at one of them. from outta nowhere! and it's just... odd. And then you later retract it. So you jump out, yell stuff, and then blend back into the crowd.... But perhaps the most damning thing is you do contradict yourself ma'am.... But i'll let you speak for yourself: I guess it's just that when I see a vote, even a random vote at the beginning, I like to see a reason for it. I hate a post that just says vote ____. If you had time to wait for the votee to respond, and then to reply to THAT, you had time to put your reasons in your first post and then go to bed. Like I said earlier, the way he did what he did just seemed very unnecessary. Had it been just a "Vote Kat, because I always do," and then nothing else, I wouldn't have thought it was a big deal. It would have then been a random vote just like the rest of them. The way he said it, with the "I won't be adding more tonight," implied that there was more than randomness to it, and that he would add it after he got some sleep...but if that's the case, then why not add it in the original post, if you have time to wait for a response and then respond to that? I guess I just get wary of people holding back info, however slight or meaningless it is. [snip] [That was reply #187] The bolding is mine. Now I may be jus' a simple farmboy and all, but that makes me think you dislike people who randomly vote.... Especially those who do it without explain' themselves. Ya know? Which is what you had said in reply #33: But (and this is the paranoia in me speaking now) how can you tell someone is using random.org? That's why I never use random.org. In the end, it's completely unverifiable. I either abstain from voting early off, or find a silly reason for what is essentially a random vote, like what I did with hockeymonkey. In the end, it's still random, and will probably change multiple times before the Day ends. Now... if I'm getting you right.... One of the reason's you disliked the MtS/Kat issue was because of a random voting you felt on their parts. It's something you disliked. But yet... it's something you DON'T mind doing. You seem to enjoy the joke votes and the random votes.... But i tend to find that kinda... meanspirited to vote for people randomly and retract it alot. And then to say that you dislike that behavior in other people, and that you hate the votes that are just "vote ____". But it's okay if they add a joke to it? That don't sit right with me ma'am, and so I'm sorry, but You will be recieving my vote DrainBead. I thank you for your support, and for your kind words to me. But I just don't like your behavior and actions in respect to your words to other people. I'm sorry.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 0:54:55 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Jul 27, 2007 0:54:55 GMT -5
JSexton and Drainbead.... This is where it gets tricky. JSexton I had initial suspicions of. Mainly his random vote of Dotchan. Since then we've had time to talk and such though. However in the most recent vote count, i still a vote for Dotchan cast by JSexton. I mean to say Since then "we [the townspeople] have had time to talk, and such through. And also the next line should be: However, in the most recent vote count, I still see a vote for Dotchan
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 0:57:18 GMT -5
Post by Idle Thoughts on Jul 27, 2007 0:57:18 GMT -5
Actually, after Roosh's vote, the vote count is: drainbead (2) - storyteller0910, Roosh dotchan (1) - JSexton Malacandra (1) - Blaster Master JSexton (1) - Malacandra dnooman (1) - Hockey Monkey Mhaye (1) - kat Despite what Roosh would have you believe.
|
|
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
Jul 27, 2007 1:52:03 GMT -5
Post by Santo Rugger on Jul 27, 2007 1:52:03 GMT -5
<snip> The other player: Pygmy Rugger, who has posted 14 times, mostly jokes and comments about sigs, avatars, and such. I liked his one post--reply#117--but the last sentence "(Hint, hint, to those of you not posting any actual content. I'm not saying you need to post a lot, or not have any fluff posts, but story and I went, let's hear what you have to say.)" is a bit ironic.<snip> At this point in the game, when I say "actual content", I mean posts that generate additional discussion, even if it's simply a reply from another player. I believe many of my posts have done just that, even with the jokes mixed in. Other than generating discussion, there's not really much else we have to go on. It is Day One, after all. You still get the FoS for not telling me what a good job I did on HMs avtar! #nosignature#
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 2:03:32 GMT -5
Post by RoOsh on Jul 27, 2007 2:03:32 GMT -5
Actually, after Roosh's vote, the vote count is: drainbead (2) - storyteller0910, Roosh dotchan (1) - JSexton Malacandra (1) - Blaster Master JSexton (1) - Malacandra dnooman (1) - Hockey Monkey Mhaye (1) - kat Despite what Roosh would have you believe. Hey, I just picked your old Vote count and c/p'ed it.... Heh. I didn't count the votes that had been made since then. Just to clear the air.
|
|
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
Jul 27, 2007 2:27:28 GMT -5
Post by Merestil Haye on Jul 27, 2007 2:27:28 GMT -5
[Unvoting GreedySmurf] also forces me to reread the thread again. Boo! So anyway, two more people came to my attention this time. mhaye has posted twice: Most recently about name color, and prior to that, he brought up the "grudges from previous games are bad" issue. That first post included the "Just because Kat was Cult in M5, does not mean that she's a Psychopath in this one. (It doesn't mean she's not, either)." Paranoia loomed here, of course: Is he trying to subtly link me to the Psychos? Paranoia got shut up in a box for now while I try to convince it that he was joking, but mhaye could stand to say something of substance. (snip Pygmy Rugger comment.) Based again on lack of content, vote mhaye. Especially since I know he can put together decent posts, I've seen him do it, but he's not doing it here. Could be lack of time, since he's still in MV...could be something else. I apologise to Kat and everyone else for my low participation. I cannot post during the working day (which should be from 8am to 6pm, 2pm Fridays). I guess I'm going to be late this morning. You spared me blushes for repeating myself (or at least spending the time searching my posts to ensure I hadn't made a "grudges are bad" post). Thanks. I also spent a lot of last night fighting off sleep. I gave up about 11 and went to bed with this thread mostly unread. I've just caught up with it. I'll have more time this afternoon, and even more over the weekend while everyone in M5 sleeps. I'll do some posting then.#nosignature#
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 2:57:30 GMT -5
Post by Malacandra on Jul 27, 2007 2:57:30 GMT -5
Yeah, but read the Pre Game stuff in this form. I changed my mind on it. But it's okay that you did it... Mal did it earlier and I didn't call him out on it either because it was just to fix typos or add things. Just try not to do it again, that's all. Oops - sorry. Damned admins changing their minds about what's allowed and what isn't. ;D
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 6:14:28 GMT -5
Post by Drain Bead on Jul 27, 2007 6:14:28 GMT -5
dotchan (1) - JSexton Malacandra (1) - Blaster Master JSexton (1) - Malacandra drainbead (1) - storyteller0910 I was going to agree with Kat vote of GreedySmurf actually a few pages back when she first accused him, but now I must say Greedy's done an admirable job of returning and talking. So I see no reason for voting for the guy. My feeling Dotchan and Malacandra are neutral. I don't really think they deserve the votes and i think they're fine. I wouldn't vote for them yet, and so I wont. JSexton and Drainbead.... This is where it gets tricky. JSexton I had initial suspicions of. Mainly his random vote of Dotchan. Since then we've had time to talk and such though. However in the most recent vote count, i still a vote for Dotchan cast by JSexton. If he hasn't found anything else yet to go on, and still feels random is the best, more power to him. However... it just don't sit right with me. I'm gonna wait one more day for JSexton. But he's on my list right now of Eyeballin'Dudes. Drainbead. I remember liking you. And that struck me as suspicous. Early on in teh game, I felt that I can't trust anyone but myself, but for somereason i started to like you. It was because you agreed with me on two points. But I didn't like that feeling. It's like you want me on your side maybe as we're both new to the game? But I remember being leery on you because I disliked your first joke vote for hockeymonkey because of the color of her font. It was a vote that didn't sit well with me, and thats what later made me feel icky of you when you were on my side. It was nice for your defense, but I remembered you were a joke voter initially. -But you retract the vote on Reply #172 whihc is nice. -But then in Reply #173 (I'm sorry, i don't know how to link yet) you state: "And what the hell....vote Blaster Master, since the gray is almost as annoying as the yellow."You go and do it again! When you pulled out the Joke vote for BlastaMasta cuz of HIS colored font. I mean, i got the joke the first time, but again. With a game like this noone really likes suspicious people, and votes are a way of getting suspicion on people. It almost seems like a way to fish for votes, to see if anyone "bites" proverbially speaking, ya know? Most uncool, DrainBead.... Most uncool. Your MadTheSwine line was also unneeded i felt. Like Kat/MtS had their lil joke things (from reading the old posts) and so i knew what that was about but then you come in and cast suspicion on MtS. Again, it goes with your previous behavior... you kinda like just pointing at someone, and seeing if anything bites it seems. I've only been noticing this, because again you'd been defending me and i remember disliking your behavior. It's like... in the middle of a gunfight with someone else, two dudes are facing each other. And then you just show up and pull your own taunts out at one of them. from outta nowhere! and it's just... odd. And then you later retract it. So you jump out, yell stuff, and then blend back into the crowd.... But perhaps the most damning thing is you do contradict yourself ma'am.... But i'll let you speak for yourself: I guess it's just that when I see a vote, even a random vote at the beginning, I like to see a reason for it. I hate a post that just says vote ____. If you had time to wait for the votee to respond, and then to reply to THAT, you had time to put your reasons in your first post and then go to bed. Like I said earlier, the way he did what he did just seemed very unnecessary. Had it been just a "Vote Kat, because I always do," and then nothing else, I wouldn't have thought it was a big deal. It would have then been a random vote just like the rest of them. The way he said it, with the "I won't be adding more tonight," implied that there was more than randomness to it, and that he would add it after he got some sleep...but if that's the case, then why not add it in the original post, if you have time to wait for a response and then respond to that? I guess I just get wary of people holding back info, however slight or meaningless it is. [snip] [That was reply #187] The bolding is mine. Now I may be jus' a simple farmboy and all, but that makes me think you dislike people who randomly vote.... Especially those who do it without explain' themselves. Ya know? Which is what you had said in reply #33: That's why I never use random.org. In the end, it's completely unverifiable. I either abstain from voting early off, or find a silly reason for what is essentially a random vote, like what I did with hockeymonkey. In the end, it's still random, and will probably change multiple times before the Day ends. Now... if I'm getting you right.... One of the reason's you disliked the MtS/Kat issue was because of a random voting you felt on their parts. It's something you disliked. But yet... it's something you DON'T mind doing. You seem to enjoy the joke votes and the random votes.... But i tend to find that kinda... meanspirited to vote for people randomly and retract it alot. And then to say that you dislike that behavior in other people, and that you hate the votes that are just "vote ____". But it's okay if they add a joke to it? That don't sit right with me ma'am, and so I'm sorry, but You will be recieving my vote DrainBead. I thank you for your support, and for your kind words to me. But I just don't like your behavior and actions in respect to your words to other people. I'm sorry. I think you're misunderstanding my issue with MTS, which is odd since I've repeated myself on that one multiple times. I'm fine with random voting in the beginning--it's all we have to go on. What I'm not fine with is people not saying their reasoning, especially the further on we get in the Day. I really, really hate posts that are just "vote X" or "vote X, I'll explain later." Maybe it's because in my first game of Mafia, I died when a couple of opportunistic scum jumped on a bandwagon of mine with those kind of votes close to the end of the Day, thus putting the hammer on me and ending the game. I know it's early now and not the same situation at all, but I get really leery of votes without explanations, even if the explanation is "random.org" or "I vote for this person in every game we're in". It doesn't sit right with me and never has.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 7:54:13 GMT -5
Post by storyteller0910 on Jul 27, 2007 7:54:13 GMT -5
I think you're misunderstanding my issue with MTS, which is odd since I've repeated myself on that one multiple times. I'm fine with random voting in the beginning--it's all we have to go on. What I'm not fine with is people not saying their reasoning, especially the further on we get in the Day. I really, really hate posts that are just "vote X" or "vote X, I'll explain later." Maybe it's because in my first game of Mafia, I died when a couple of opportunistic scum jumped on a bandwagon of mine with those kind of votes close to the end of the Day, thus putting the hammer on me and ending the game. I know it's early now and not the same situation at all, but I get really leery of votes without explanations, even if the explanation is "random.org" or "I vote for this person in every game we're in". It doesn't sit right with me and never has. Well, there are two issues here. The first is philosophical. I think you seem to draw distinctions that are essentially arbitrary. I pointed this out earlier when you drew one between an "official" FoS and what you characterize as a "discussion" post that nonetheless points suspicion at someone. I'd argue that these are the same act - both suggest to the reader that you find the subject of your post suspicious, and create a general air of possible scumminess about them, without having any actual game consequences (a vote has such consequences). As I said before, when someone emphasizes this non-difference as a defense, it seems disingenuous; your first post about Mad was obviously meant to raise concerns about him, which is fine, but pretending that it didn't have that intent just because you never used the acronym "FoS" seems squirrelly to me. I also think the distinction between "vote Kat" and "random.org says vote Kat" is so small as to be irrelevant. Voting based on random.org is voting without a reason; it's just giving your reasonless vote an artificial authority behind it. Pursuing Mad on this basis while giving a pass to the random.org voters and the color-of-the-name voters doesn't really make sense to me. -------------- But there is a more significant problem, one you have not addressed. In his first post, Mad does indeed vote for Kat with no elaboration. However, his elaboration came only three minutes later, when he says he was "just beating [Kat] to the punch" - obviously a reference to her post, earlier, telling him to "do something suspicious so I can vote for you." In other words, he did explain his vote, not in the same post, but less than five minutes later. Your own response came more than ten hours later, so obviously you saw both of his posts. And in the actual post in question, you did not mention his voting without reason. You referred instead to him "acting very much like he did in the current game over on the SDMB" - this on the basis of only two posts, a vote and an explanation thereof. When called on how unlikely this seemed, you began referring to the "vote without explanation thing," which: (1) could have applied to anyone (2) wasn't even true (3) wasn't the reason you initially gave for suspecting him and (4) wasn't anything at all like he played in the current game on the SDMB. Think I'll hang on to my current vote a while longer.
|
|
|
Day One
Jul 27, 2007 8:10:45 GMT -5
Post by Mad The Swine on Jul 27, 2007 8:10:45 GMT -5
That should be HOS instead of HOF er, is that Hoof of Suspicion? Hehe ..Yup
|
|
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 One
Jul 27, 2007 8:29:50 GMT -5
Post by Blaster Master on Jul 27, 2007 8:29:50 GMT -5
Given the parameters of this game is it worth lynching someone on day 1? As I understand it the probability is we will lynch a Towny, so is it worth that probable loss to give the remaining townies a data point to anaylse for scum tells? I know others have weighed in on this point, and I'll try not to reitterate their points too much, but it is very definitely a bad idea to no lynch on the first day, even with no leads. Deaths, with a few exceptions *cough* Autolycus*cough* generate information. Deaths generate information because they give us indisputable information about the alignment of one individual from which we can make inferences about the alignments of those who agreed/disagreed, voted for/against, interacted/avoided, etc. The other important point to keep in mind is that this is a game of information, in which the psychos have a lot of it, certain power roles have some of it, and everyone else has pretty darn close to squadoosh. What the scum have in information, the rest of the town makes up for in sheer numbers. It is a game of information in which the scum try to leverage their information to gain a numerical advantage, and the town must leverage their numerical advantage to gain an informational one. Thus, if a vanilla townie's death will bring us information that will lead to the lynching of a psycho, then it is a worthy trade. Obviously, we can't be frivilous with our lives, and a vanilla townie should still try to provide evidence to avoid getting lynched versus simply resigning to his death. At this point, while there are weak, there are clearly some kindred and adversarial associations developing, and thus, a lynch will lead to focusing on which of these relationships to the lynchee are worth further exploration.
|
|