AND we would lose his kitty avatar...Rishi wrote:This is why I don't support an MoS lynch. Yes, MoS is dangerous if he's scum, but if he's town (which is 75% likely), he's a huge asset to lose.
T_T
AND we would lose his kitty avatar...Rishi wrote:This is why I don't support an MoS lynch. Yes, MoS is dangerous if he's scum, but if he's town (which is 75% likely), he's a huge asset to lose.
Oh yeah, did I hear something about you getting Glork's avi?Mastermind of Sin wrote:Actually it's a cake avatar, at least for the next month. But if you keep me alive for a month, the kitty can return!
There's a very big difference between proxying and what's going on here.MoS wrote:I came upon this problem in another game, where people tried to give their votes to other people because they were protown.
You were top of the list. You just happened to be there along with 8 other people.MoS wrote:I come up town you can say you were just going along with the majority and point out that you had me somewhere in the middle of your list.
It had been two days since anyone voted. I found it difficult to imagine that anyone else would. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.Mizzy wrote:Voting for someone before all the vote strings were in, and voting without discussion really bothers me. It also bothers me that he makes his actions out to be honorable. Voting an unconfirmed "winner" without talk first and giving the impression he thought we would all do the same...grr. I don't like it.
Is it just me, or is there something inherently flawed with wanting the lynch of your #2 lynch candidate?Mizzy wrote:Well, we DO need a lynch, and he IS my #2.
No, I think that's just you, especially since my number one candidate was, if you look at my old vote chain, not someone I thought was scum. There's more than one scum in the game, you know, so why should having a second choice be a bad thing?somestrangeflea wrote:Is it just me, or is there something inherently flawed with wanting the lynch of your #2 lynch candidate?Mizzy wrote:Well, we DO need a lynch, and he IS my #2.
Did the part where we don't have 10 mafia in this game ever occur to you?TrustGossip wrote:I would like to say a big LOL that the most recent conversations have basically illuminated my point that condorcet lists are anti-town.
No-one has really been truthful with them, all they serve as are tools to manipulate collective opinion.
Minor FOS: Everyone except Rishi and MoS
Condorcet = NOOOO
Did it ever occur to you that constant anxiety over the setup and the mechanics of triumvirates could possibly cause this game to become a cesspool of stagnation that is the perfect ecological niche for scum?Mizzy wrote:Did the part where we don't have 10 mafia in this game ever occur to you?
No, there isn't, and you know it. The fundamental problem with both situations is divestment of responsibility. They're a lot more similar than you're making them out to be.somestrangeflea wrote:There's a very big difference between proxying and what's going on here.MoS wrote:I came upon this problem in another game, where people tried to give their votes to other people because they were protown.
So why does your suspicion list have 8 people tied for first? Unafraid to single anyone out on your own?You were top of the list. You just happened to be there along with 8 other people.MoS wrote:I come up town you can say you were just going along with the majority and point out that you had me somewhere in the middle of your list.
Actually, yes it has. I said I'd be perfectly happy to vote for a good scum candidate, but none had really showed itself. My hesitancy was not JUST because of the game set-up but also because of a lack of a target.TrustGossip wrote:Did it ever occur to you that constant anxiety over the setup and the mechanics of triumvirates could possibly cause this game to become a cesspool of stagnation that is the perfect ecological niche for scum?
With how little participation we had, at the time, I thought the condorcet voting was better than a deadline lynch and a no-lynch. Lesser of evils. If my opinion is not correct in your eyes, it does not make me scum. It just means that we have conflicting opinions.TrustGossip wrote:1. Agreeing to condorcet voting.On the surface this seems to be a mechanistic way to find some way to end the day. In reality this is like discussing your country's counterintelligence program while knowing that spies are in your midst.
Or, it could be that not all of us were voting for scum and were voting for lurkers, instead. But that doesn't mean the lists were falsified. My list was honest...I had someone I felt was lurking too much in slot A and possible scum in slot B...but I wasn't sure enough of the scum candidate to lynch him at that point.TrustGossip wrote:2. Falsifying condorcet results. There are two reasons why someone would do this. Either they would like to appease the restrictions of condorcet methodology and they have a tenuous grasp of who they are suspicious of, or they are intentionally misrepresenting suspicion in order to manipulate possible voting.
I especially dislike this. Why are you meant to be pro-town, again?somestrangeflea wrote:You were top of the list. You just happened to be there along with 8 other people.
Okay. Cop result claims, doc probably didn't stop the NK, statistically the roleblocker shouldn't have used their night action and either way didn't do anything. Assume we've got an innocent result and a dead townie. Now what? I mean siriusly, this is why we can't have nice things, kids; we need scumhunting, not so much just a lynch.Skitzer wrote:I honestly don't truly agree with condorcet voting. But I DO feel we need to get off Day 1
Oh, you were referring to #2 on your vote list. I thought you meant just #2 in general...Mizzy wrote:No, I think that's just you, especially since my number one candidate was, if you look at my old vote chain, not someone I thought was scum. There's more than one scum in the game, you know, so why should having a second choice be a bad thing?somestrangeflea wrote:Is it just me, or is there something inherently flawed with wanting the lynch of your #2 lynch candidate?Mizzy wrote:Well, we DO need a lynch, and he IS my #2.
If I proxy my vote onto someone else, I think that person is town. Going along with the condorcet results is essentially me proxying my vote to the entire town, which is guaranteed to have three scum manipulating it and is therefore... worse.Mastermind of Sin wrote:No, there isn't, and you know it. The fundamental problem with both situations is divestment of responsibility. They're a lot more similar than you're making them out to be.
Unafraid?Mastermind of Sin wrote:So why does your suspicion list have 8 people tied for first? Unafraid to single anyone out on your own?
...what? In what way is that even vaguely correct? I suppose it's irrelevant, but I still wonder what's going on there.somestrangeflea wrote:Going along with the condorcet results is essentially me proxying my vote to the entire town
How useful are claims in this game though? If a scum is going down, there's a good chance that they are going to claim Triumvirate which will force us to turn our attentions elsewhere. (Since the Three Triumvirates aren't going to counterclaim.)Elmo wrote: Not sure what'll happen if we wagon someone claiming triumvirate. I would suggest thatwe never put anyone at more than L-2 without a claimas a scum quickhammer would be very viable if people didn't unvote.
I have to agree, claims are basically useless. Even if scum claims townie, everyone is gonna be up in arms saying "oh, a scum wouldn't claim townie, they'd claim trium!".Rishi wrote:How useful are claims in this game though? If a scum is going down, there's a good chance that they are going to claim Triumvirate which will force us to turn our attentions elsewhere. (Since the Three Triumvirates aren't going to counterclaim.)Elmo wrote: Not sure what'll happen if we wagon someone claiming triumvirate. I would suggest thatwe never put anyone at more than L-2 without a claimas a scum quickhammer would be very viable if people didn't unvote.