|
Post by Elements on Aug 23, 2019 20:24:08 GMT
Mine are to use up posts so I can get a pagetop vote count
|
|
|
Post by erratic on Aug 23, 2019 21:25:46 GMT
Officer, I didn't mean to imply my random vote on a player who hasn't contributed was a form of meaningful input
However I can now appreciate grilling Mr is a form of input even if I don't like it so you're not high on my shit list
|
|
|
Post by blitzcrank on Aug 23, 2019 22:03:47 GMT
I hereby decalre you my bitter enemy. I would need to be convinced that voting for another player would not be a violation of the First Law. As a robot myself, I assure you voting for mortals is not forbidden. dot is the best account seaber and officer are town
|
|
|
Post by offbyscum on Aug 24, 2019 8:37:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rdaneelolivaw on Aug 24, 2019 8:54:14 GMT
Random eliminate day 1 is definitely a town play statistically, and while random voting someone who hasn’t posted yet is a smidge unfair, it doesn’t really swing a read either way. While saying this may disadvantage me this game, it seems important to say it, for the benefit of town in this and future games.
If we eliminate a random active player on day 1, then that provides an incentive for players to be as inactive as possible, as it makes a eliminate on them less desirable. This incentive structure is not good for town.
|
|
|
Post by rdaneelolivaw on Aug 24, 2019 8:54:58 GMT
Also, my access for the next day or so will be somewhat limited. I may have to resort to trimensional viewing.
|
|
|
Post by offbyscum on Aug 24, 2019 9:12:56 GMT
Random eliminate day 1 is definitely a town play statistically, and while random voting someone who hasn’t posted yet is a smidge unfair, it doesn’t really swing a read either way. While saying this may disadvantage me this game, it seems important to say it, for the benefit of town in this and future games.
If we eliminate a random active player on day 1, then that provides an incentive for players to be as inactive as possible, as it makes a eliminate on them less desirable. This incentive structure is not good for town.
I agree. I aim to form as many reads as possible on active players then eliminate an active lurker.
|
|
seaberalt1
Bus Interchange
Obviously not Seaber
Posts: 1,276
|
Post by seaberalt1 on Aug 24, 2019 12:33:28 GMT
alt - 8 Apprentice Seer - 2 Bingo - 0 Blitzcrank - 2 citceh - 3 dot - 9 erratic - 10 ersatz - 3 nothectic - 15 offbyscum - 28 officer - 5 player34 - 3 rdaneelolivaw - 11 seaberalt1 - 36 Tokio - 0 town - 2
Just wondered what the score was thought y'all might like to know too. And not to blow myself or anything but I'm winning ))))))
|
|
alt
Jailor
My Walter count: 3
Posts: 222
|
Post by alt on Aug 24, 2019 13:05:48 GMT
|
|
alt
Jailor
My Walter count: 3
Posts: 222
|
Post by alt on Aug 24, 2019 13:16:13 GMT
I'd imagine then that Thilbert is one of Bingo and Tokio then if he's actually v/la. My guess would be the other is Emily since she's the only new player
|
|
|
Post by Officer on Aug 24, 2019 13:21:57 GMT
Officer "Officer" Officer checking in. I'd like to refer a Mental Health Officer to all Seers and Apprentice Seers of the town. Aid may be required to counter any hallucinations they may be experiencing. On another note, the higher-ups are pressuring me to inquire more into the various citizens of the town. I highly value my job security, so I apologise for the late night visits any of you may encounter. Officer, I didn't mean to imply my random vote on a player who hasn't contributed was a form of meaningful input However I can now appreciate grilling Mr is a form of input even if I don't like it so you're not high on my shit list While erratic is in the interrogation room, I'd like the detectives to ask them which citizens of the town are high on their "shit list", and if they agree that their vote wasn't a form of meaningful input, why they didn't cast a random vote on someone contributing, or someone high or their aforementioned "shit list". If you have the time, a good follow-up question would be to ask them to specify the non-filler content rdaneeloliver has posted thus far. Random eliminate day 1 is definitely a town play statistically, and while random voting someone who hasn’t posted yet is a smidge unfair, it doesn’t really swing a read either way. I'd like Agent "Agent" Agent to pay a visit to apprenticeseer. Try and work out why they don't think a random vote on someone who hasn't entered the game yet, rather than one on someone who is participating in the thread, is not a bad vote and alignment-indicative. Explain to them that lawbreakers would rather evade confrontation, and are fine with casting a vote on someone who cannot respond. seaber and officer are town Attempt to Locate the reason blitzcrank has to read seaber and I as civilians. . . . In other news, there's been a series of Motor Vehicle Accidents on Masonry Road. I don't mean to alarm anyone, but we may have a Serial Driver on our hands here; I shall look into this matter and return with any information I may find.
|
|
seaberalt1
Bus Interchange
Obviously not Seaber
Posts: 1,276
|
Post by seaberalt1 on Aug 24, 2019 13:26:03 GMT
I'd imagine then that Thilbert is one of Bingo and Tokio then if he's actually v/la. My guess would be the other is Emily since she's the only new player I'm also a new player
|
|
alt
Jailor
My Walter count: 3
Posts: 222
|
Post by alt on Aug 24, 2019 13:29:07 GMT
I'd imagine then that Thilbert is one of Bingo and Tokio then if he's actually v/la. My guess would be the other is Emily since she's the only new player I'm also a new player I assume you're either Seaber pulling the ultimate big brain play or Arnie pulling the ultimate big brain play
|
|
|
Post by erratic on Aug 24, 2019 13:38:41 GMT
While erratic is in the interrogation room, I'd like the detectives to ask them which citizens of the town are high on their "shit list", and if they agree that their vote wasn't a form of meaningful input, why they didn't cast a random vote on someone contributing, or someone high or their aforementioned "shit list". If you have the time, a good follow-up question would be to ask them to specify the non-filler content rdaneeloliver has posted thus far.
"Townreads are meaningless 3 pages into the game, and before a nightphase there's nothing concrete to be gained anyway. I'm not particularly worried about any "pressure" being applied here; it would be extremely scummy to eliminate me anytime soon given that the day lasts 11 irl days. If someone does hammer me, then you know who to kill tomorrow. I said that lynching me at this stage of the day phase is scummy. Therefore I should not be worried about the "pressure" being applied at this point." Arguably these alone approach being content, at least he's talking about the game (note I'm not setting the bar particularly high yet I voted for someone who hasn't said anything mainly to remind people they exist, like rdaneeloliver said it shouldn't be incentiveised to say nothing and get away with it. If none of the active members make a scumslip (which hasn't happened so far) then in 9 or so days time I'd much rather eliminate a low activity player because I think that will be much more helpful in terms of futura activity and also the benefit of actually being to look back at their posts
|
|
|
Post by nothectic on Aug 24, 2019 13:40:12 GMT
While saying this may disadvantage me this game, it seems important to say it, for the benefit of town in this and future games.
If we eliminate a random active player on day 1, then that provides an incentive for players to be as inactive as possible, as it makes a eliminate on them less desirable. This incentive structure is not good for town.
I agree. I aim to form as many reads as possible on active players then eliminate an active lurker.
This point about lurkers is fair. Looking at tokio's profile, they were online for a point after they were voted for, yet still haven't said anything.
tokio, care to comment on your current situation?
|
|
seaberalt1
Bus Interchange
Obviously not Seaber
Posts: 1,276
|
Post by seaberalt1 on Aug 24, 2019 14:12:37 GMT
I assume you're either Seaber pulling the ultimate big brain play or Arnie pulling the ultimate big brain play What if I'm neither?
|
|
alt
Jailor
My Walter count: 3
Posts: 222
|
Post by alt on Aug 24, 2019 14:18:02 GMT
Then I'm wrong and that's terrible
|
|
seaberalt1
Bus Interchange
Obviously not Seaber
Posts: 1,276
|
Post by seaberalt1 on Aug 24, 2019 14:18:08 GMT
"Townreads are meaningless 3 pages into the game, and before a nightphase there's nothing concrete to be gained anyway. I'm not particularly worried about any "pressure" being applied here; it would be extremely scummy to eliminate me anytime soon given that the day lasts 11 irl days. If someone does hammer me, then you know who to kill tomorrow. I said that lynching me at this stage of the day phase is scummy. Therefore I should not be worried about the "pressure" being applied at this point." Arguably these alone approach being content, at least he's talking about the game (note I'm not setting the bar particularly high yet I voted for someone who hasn't said anything mainly to remind people they exist, like rdaneeloliver said it shouldn't be incentiveised to say nothing and get away with it. If none of the active members make a scumslip (which hasn't happened so far) then in 9 or so days time I'd much rather eliminate a low activity player because I think that will be much more helpful in terms of futura activity and also the benefit of actually being to look back at their posts If someone says nothing they will get fongered by the mod? When does this day end if no eliminate? The 1st of Sept? I'd much rather eliminate mafia )))))
|
|
alt
Jailor
My Walter count: 3
Posts: 222
|
Post by alt on Aug 24, 2019 14:31:13 GMT
With 16 alive it takes 9 to eliminateThe day will end at 11:59 on the 1st of September unless a majority is reached before. We have a full week
|
|
seaberalt1
Bus Interchange
Obviously not Seaber
Posts: 1,276
|
Post by seaberalt1 on Aug 24, 2019 14:39:22 GMT
With 16 alive it takes 9 to eliminateThe day will end at 11:59 on the 1st of September unless a majority is reached before. We have a full week Plenty of time for you and your buddies to slip then )))))
|
|
|
Post by Elements on Aug 24, 2019 15:13:21 GMT
Prods will be going out later today to Bingo and Tokio if they don't post as stated in rule 9.
|
|
|
Post by Apprentice Seer on Aug 24, 2019 15:54:20 GMT
I'd like Agent "Agent" Agent to pay a visit to apprenticeseer. Try and work out why they don't think a random vote on someone who hasn't entered the game yet, rather than one on someone who is participating in the thread, is not a bad vote and alignment-indicative. Explain to them that lawbreakers would rather evade confrontation, and are fine with casting a vote on someone who cannot respond. So to clarify: I wouldn’t choose to vote someone who is inactive, especially at this point in the game - I agree it doesn’t seem like the best idea. I also wasn’t talking about lynching an inactive player, more discussing judging someone for a single random vote on an inactive player. My thought process goes like this: For voting inactive players -encourages them to participate -better than punishing active players who you have no clear read on, especially if they already have multiple votes this early Against voting inactive players -unfair because we have no info on them, and they may be unable to get online -avoidance of confrontation Having considered all this (credit to Officer for the point on avoidance of confrontation), I don’t think it is particularly scummy to put a single random vote on an inactive player so early in the game, and while I agree it isn’t a good idea, it doesn’t completely swing my opinion on their alignment (as stated earlier) As a final point, even if one player is inactive, other players are online, and will call you out on anything you say, especially since it’s permanently displayed for people to quote. So whilst someone may think voting an inactive player is way of avoiding confrontation, it doesn’t seem to be an effective way of doing that.
|
|
|
Post by bingo on Aug 24, 2019 16:17:29 GMT
Hello I have been expecting you all *twiddles v Italian mostauche* It is I bingo, I have manage to catch up on all such interactions in town today. My read so far is that Officer if they continue to post in a vein as they are doing currently will be v hard to read. While lynching an inactive player does mean that we don’t punish active players makes sense to me however as such a player I have been v busy recently so not had time to post much. This shall now not be a problem (I hope) as my very impressive game of bingo shall start soon.
Additionally would like to hear from dot about why Arnie is SK definitely, but also reasons for random voting as doesn’t make sense to me.
For now I have said my part. *twiddles Italian mostauche*
|
|
|
Post by bingo on Aug 24, 2019 16:21:08 GMT
*twiddles Italian mostauche*
I think so far that there is v little information on anything so would like to hear why nothectic is not hectic? Also my take on Alt is that they are trying to cook something up to get town read and not sure how I feel about that 🤔.
*twiddle well groomed Italian mostauche*
|
|
|
Post by bingo on Aug 24, 2019 16:23:07 GMT
*twiddles Italian mostauche*
Who is for voting for someone inactive and voting for someone active?
*twiddles thick Italian mostauche*
|
|
|
Post by bingo on Aug 24, 2019 16:30:37 GMT
*twiddles mostauche Italianly*
Personally I wouldn’t be against lynching one of the inactive players however I think lynching one of the more active players could give us more information.
*twiddles Italian mostauche intently*
|
|
|
Post by erratic on Aug 24, 2019 16:41:52 GMT
*twiddles mostauche Italianly* Personally I wouldn’t be against lynching one of the inactive players however I think lynching one of the more active players could give us more information. *twiddles Italian mostauche intently* I am in favour of lynching inactives as they are well known to be thorns in town-side plus the whole 'we won't get much info from their flip' arguement is not right because there is always a great deal of potentially revealing argument about who/if to eliminate. However with your posting and thilberts known awayness the point may be moot anyway
|
|
|
Post by Officer on Aug 24, 2019 16:47:03 GMT
Officer "Officer" Officer taking up office. False alarm on the case of the Serial Driver. Turns out it was a simple civilian riding a bulky looking bicycle - an easy mistake to make to confuse one of those for a bus. So to clarify: I wouldn’t choose to vote someone who is inactive, especially at this point in the game - I agree it doesn’t seem like the best idea. I also wasn’t talking about lynching an inactive player, more discussing judging someone for a single random vote on an inactive player. My thought process goes like this: For voting inactive players -encourages them to participate -better than punishing active players who you have no clear read on, especially if they already have multiple votes this early Against voting inactive players -unfair because we have no info on them, and they may be unable to get online -avoidance of confrontation Having considered all this (credit to Officer for the point on avoidance of confrontation), I don’t think it is particularly scummy to put a single random vote on an inactive player so early in the game, and while I agree it isn’t a good idea, it doesn’t completely swing my opinion on their alignment (as stated earlier) As a final point, even if one player is inactive, other players are online, and will call you out on anything you say, especially since it’s permanently displayed for people to quote. So whilst someone may think voting an inactive player is way of avoiding confrontation, it doesn’t seem to be an effective way of doing that. Agent "Agent" Agent's visit to apprenticeseer's abode has been most fruitful. A follow up check-in however could yield even more vegetables. Regarding apprenticeseer's first point on "For voting inactive players", ask them why they're making the assumption the inactive player in question has gotten round to reading the thread, or even knows the game has started. Each game, there are often 1 or 2 players that forget the game has started, or haven't got the time to read it yet; a vote on them will not encourage them to contribute, because they're not reading the thread and simply can't see the vote or feel the pressure. On their second point, ask them why voting for active players is a way of punishing them. Wagons on town members are not a bad thing, they help to discern the alignment of the wagonee in question, since lawbreakers are more likely to crack under pressure. "Townreads are meaningless 3 pages into the game, and before a nightphase there's nothing concrete to be gained anyway. I'm not particularly worried about any "pressure" being applied here; it would be extremely scummy to eliminate me anytime soon given that the day lasts 11 irl days. If someone does hammer me, then you know who to kill tomorrow. I said that lynching me at this stage of the day phase is scummy. Therefore I should not be worried about the "pressure" being applied at this point." Arguably these alone approach being content, at least he's talking about the game (note I'm not setting the bar particularly high yet I voted for someone who hasn't said anything mainly to remind people they exist, like rdaneeloliver said it shouldn't be incentiveised to say nothing and get away with it. If none of the active members make a scumslip (which hasn't happened so far) then in 9 or so days time I'd much rather eliminate a low activity player because I think that will be much more helpful in terms of futura activity and also the benefit of actually being to look back at their posts Let the detectives know that further interrogation of erratic may not be necessary. However, do have Agent "Agent" Agent pay them a casual Independent Custody Visit, and question them on their opinion on the same matters that Agent "Agent" Agent inquired apprenticeseer about. . . . I have received several reports concerning certain citizens in the town sporting... moustaches. The individuals in question would be alt, nothectic, and Bingo. Though I do not understand why choice of facial hair should affect our investigation, I will contact the Central Communications Command to investigate if there is any merit to these reports.
|
|
|
Post by bingo on Aug 24, 2019 16:56:07 GMT
Officer "Officer" Officer taking up office. False alarm on the case of the Serial Driver. Turns out it was a simple civilian riding a bulky looking bicycle - an easy mistake to make to confuse one of those for a bus. So to clarify: I wouldn’t choose to vote someone who is inactive, especially at this point in the game - I agree it doesn’t seem like the best idea. I also wasn’t talking about lynching an inactive player, more discussing judging someone for a single random vote on an inactive player. My thought process goes like this: For voting inactive players -encourages them to participate -better than punishing active players who you have no clear read on, especially if they already have multiple votes this early Against voting inactive players -unfair because we have no info on them, and they may be unable to get online -avoidance of confrontation Having considered all this (credit to Officer for the point on avoidance of confrontation), I don’t think it is particularly scummy to put a single random vote on an inactive player so early in the game, and while I agree it isn’t a good idea, it doesn’t completely swing my opinion on their alignment (as stated earlier) As a final point, even if one player is inactive, other players are online, and will call you out on anything you say, especially since it’s permanently displayed for people to quote. So whilst someone may think voting an inactive player is way of avoiding confrontation, it doesn’t seem to be an effective way of doing that. Agent "Agent" Agent's visit to apprenticeseer's abode has been most fruitful. A follow up check-in however could yield even more vegetables. Regarding apprenticeseer's first point on "For voting inactive players", ask them why they're making the assumption the inactive player in question has gotten round to reading the thread, or even knows the game has started. Each game, there are often 1 or 2 players that forget the game has started, or haven't got the time to read it yet; a vote on them will not encourage them to contribute, because they're not reading the thread and simply can't see the vote or feel the pressure. On their second point, ask them why voting for active players is a way of punishing them. Wagons on town members are not a bad thing, they help to discern the alignment of the wagonee in question, since lawbreakers are more likely to crack under pressure. "Townreads are meaningless 3 pages into the game, and before a nightphase there's nothing concrete to be gained anyway. I'm not particularly worried about any "pressure" being applied here; it would be extremely scummy to eliminate me anytime soon given that the day lasts 11 irl days. If someone does hammer me, then you know who to kill tomorrow. I said that lynching me at this stage of the day phase is scummy. Therefore I should not be worried about the "pressure" being applied at this point." Arguably these alone approach being content, at least he's talking about the game (note I'm not setting the bar particularly high yet I voted for someone who hasn't said anything mainly to remind people they exist, like rdaneeloliver said it shouldn't be incentiveised to say nothing and get away with it. If none of the active members make a scumslip (which hasn't happened so far) then in 9 or so days time I'd much rather eliminate a low activity player because I think that will be much more helpful in terms of futura activity and also the benefit of actually being to look back at their posts Let the detectives know that further interrogation of erratic may not be necessary. However, do have Agent "Agent" Agent pay them a casual Independent Custody Visit, and question them on their opinion on the same matters that Agent "Agent" Agent inquired apprenticeseer about. . . . I have received several reports concerning certain citizens in the town sporting... moustaches. The individuals in question would be alt, nothectic, and Bingo. Though I do not understand why choice of facial hair should affect our investigation, I will contact the Central Communications Command to investigate if there is any merit to these reports. *twiddles mostauche angrily* Officer’s post seems to imply I have a moustache which is completely false and down right insulting. *twiddles mostauche hatefully*
|
|
|
Post by Elements on Aug 24, 2019 17:12:18 GMT
Tokio has been Prodded
|
|