We're actually getting a consensus? O.o I should read faster then. It'll probably be helpful to me to make mental notes along the way. Axxle requests that I watch eHalc closely.
I find any votes based solely on shar's "I got caught" straight-out bad. It was obvious sarcasm, when you read the whole thing (sentence before) as a whole. Bolding just the part that makes him look scummy without whole content is scummy.
That being said, vote: Glooble. He is acting just like he acts always as scum! He comes out of lurk with a vote on a established wagon. Classic Globscum.
I called it out because it jumped out to me, so I missed the context that framed it as snark. I recanted on a subsequent re-read.
I echo jo's thoughts on Galz.
Lot of I's in that post. Thinking about yourself huh? About not trying to make yourself get caught?
There are two primary components to mafia. One is psychological, and the other is mathematical/strategic. The presence of special roles highly accentuates the second aspect of the game. I will abbreviate the mathematical component as "theory."
F.DS is really bad at theory, and towns lose over and over because of it. I have no problem with being bossy on theory issues. For example, it's mathematically completely straightforward that the parity of the total population should be odd. Town does better with n town and m mafia than with n+1 town and m mafia when n + m is odd. You can easily check this with a computer if you don't believe me. Despite this basic fact, town lost MXI exclusively because a vigilante caused an even parity at LyLo, and lost MVIII at least partially for this reason (though town was in bad shape by that point in MVIII). This mistake is akin to something like opening mint/pearl diver. I have no problem being blunt about theory issues.
Now, if I've been bossy in a manner that people find rude, I sincerely apologize (and please call me out on it). I can't stand playing with people who call everyone an "idiot" over minor things. I certainly also make theory mistakes. I'm also not good at all at the psychological component of the game. But when I'm right about something theoretical, I'm going to be bold about it.
If the "bossiness" refers to my suggestion that others post infrequently but with more substance, see my answer below.
Overly town, typing eight posts about your thoughts seems a little excessive imo. I remember Volt in MIX was going really out of his way to analyze everyone closely in Day 2, to organize information on everyone, and he was the SK and won.
This is my post 3, about my "one-post-a-day" technique. While I appreciate yuma coming to my side, actually everyone else's reading of what I said was what I meant; what I meant was that it really would be best if people posted less often but more substantively. The pace of one good post a day works for me; do what works best for you, I guess what it means is just don't fill the forum with noise, which drowns out sound and makes the discussion harder to follow. For instance, jotheonah says in between my post 0 and my post 1a of today that "this should be interesting." How does that help the town? It doesn't give us any more of a read on jotheonah. It just gives us noise.
Now, there's one answer to this argument which I think bears a specific rebuttal. Cayvie says that people who talk spontaneously give us better reads. I don't know. I know that I got absolutely brutalized in MIX for reflexive phone-posting, causing town to lynch a doctor. Now, some of my wagon was scum, and obviously scum, and my death dragged them out, but I don't think it was worth it. Something similar happened in MVI. I thought that if I just posted all my thoughts without editing at all, it would be clear that I wasn't keeping any information from the town. Instead, my every typo became a "scumslip" and I said something foolish about a hypothetical Frisk proposed about which order theorel and I should be lynched in which caused an L - 1 wagon on me. If that wagon hadn't been boosted along by a bogus investirole-claim by ozle which was discovered to be fake due to it contradicting an earlier post of his, it would have been toodles for ehunt (and theorel would have gotten bogus town-cred out of it).
okay, so that explains it better. He's trying something new after his disaster run in MIX. But I don't necessarily agree with this. I tend to make less "noise" when I'm scum actually, because I'm just too cautious that a little snark will get me caught. Maybe it's something to analyze about someone. Regardless, experience backs him up here.
I believe the second ehunt vote is this:
Vote: ehunt
I have to say I was initially on board with ehunts idea; with such a large number of players I was smitten with the idea of less clutter more content. But as people actually started to refute this as being a bad idea it made me reevaluate my initial thoughts. Maybe its good in theory, bad in practice? Id rather encourage people to give themselves plenty of opportunities (through posting often) to produce inconsistent ideas which can be evaluated by the group. There might be more "junk" to sift through but all in all talking is good.
I don't get it. We disagree about an idea (how much signal-to-noise ratio should there be), therefore you vote for me? I am giving you a pass because you are new, but "we disagree on a theoretical issue" is not in and of itself a reason to vote. "We disagree on a theoretical issue and I think you know that I am right about the theoretical issue but you are intentionally trying to mislead the town into going the wrong way on the theoretical issue" - that would be a reason to vote for me. Is that why you voted for me? If so, you need to say it.
Agreed.
ehunt, your "one big post a day" approach - if followed by everyone - would make the game easier to play. There'd be less to read, less to follow, less to keep track of. But here's the problem: it also risks making it easier for scum to hide (and, therefore, win).
Getting people to chatter and then analyzing that chatter is one of Town's biggest weapons. Limiting chatter, therefore, reads to me as anti-town.
Hypothetically imagining a situation where eHunt's proposal was truly heard, saying that it's helpful to scum. Town read on myself.
Also, reading on, I think everyone was making too big a deal out of it. It was just a proposal. It was bad, we get it. Everyone didn't need to reiterate it, feels scummy to reiterate.
Whoops, copy+paste error.
This is my post 2.
There are two primary components to mafia. One is psychological, and the other is mathematical/strategic. The presence of special roles highly accentuates the second aspect of the game. I will abbreviate the mathematical component as "theory."
F.DS is really bad at theory, and towns lose over and over because of it. I have no problem with being bossy on theory issues. For example, it's mathematically completely straightforward that the parity of the total population should be odd. Town does better with n town and m mafia than with n+1 town and m mafia when n + m is odd. You can easily check this with a computer if you don't believe me. Despite this basic fact, town lost MXI exclusively because a vigilante caused an even parity at LyLo, and lost MVIII at least partially for this reason (though town was in bad shape by that point in MVIII). This mistake is akin to something like opening mint/pearl diver. I have no problem being blunt about theory issues.
What? This is MXI. Do you mean MIX? I thought town lost because SK Voltgloss had some weird super-voting power.
This is my post 3, about my "one-post-a-day" technique. While I appreciate yuma coming to my side, actually everyone else's reading of what I said was what I meant; what I meant was that it really would be best if people posted less often but more substantively. The pace of one good post a day works for me; do what works best for you, I guess what it means is just don't fill the forum with noise, which drowns out sound and makes the discussion harder to follow. For instance, jotheonah says in between my post 0 and my post 1a of today that "this should be interesting." How does that help the town? It doesn't give us any more of a read on jotheonah. It just gives us noise.
Your original post really wasn't phrased that way. It didn't even seem to suggest one big post + other little posts.
If everyone makes fewer posts in an effort to make posts more substantive... what will we all post about? We need something to discuss, and the conversational posts are what get us those topics. You might criticize a little post as "noise", but without that noise, you have nothing to criticize!
eHalc here does do some reiterating. Also with his first point, already mentioned in an earlier post.
skimming through now, as I believe eHunt is town and everyone else was just wasting time...
Well, O, your posts have been extremely unsatisfying but at least you showed up. So now I will vote: igbtennis to try to get the last lurker.
What? Wasn't he lurking himself?
farted?
Yes.
wow, wow, wow!
what just happened... i felt that cayvie posted a post that to me was confusing and that I didn't understand. I asked for clarification and now I am rolefishing? What does any of this have to do with role fishing?
Town reaction.
Guys, yuma scum is way more subtle than this.
OK, lots to say:
First, Unvote. Shraeye was a bad wagon. Sorry about that, didn't realize that was sarcasm. Meh. Me and my thick head
Secondly, Vote: O. He shows up, posts like twice, one of his posts being totally insignificant, and the other being just a vote. Thats...ugh. Why? O, you're better than that.
eHunt, I'm with you for the two-post-a-day thing, I really couldn't do more.
And lastly to yuma. L-5. Ugh this game is huge....
But that isn't the point, if that is correct, then I made a mistake in reading her post and now town is going to pay the consequences of it if I get lynched. Sorry.
Oh. Well. We certainly can't lynch you now then can we. Oh, please.
@yuma
Cayvie says "just a heads up, my role doesn't want to be on townie lynch wagons, so I'll refrain for voting unless I'm really sure". You reply by voting for her and asking for an explanation. It shouldn't come as a shock to you that people want to vote you for this. If you are town, you made a pretty serious mistake (which sadly often are the basis of f.Ds day 1 lynch wagons), and should at the very least be apologizing, not acting all surprised by our reaction.
I couldn't agree more. I'm fine with Cayvie's role not liking mislynch wagons. What could she possibly say to you? She can't quote her role. I think I'm actually gonna Vote: yuma. I'm OK with an O lynch too.
Very next post:
Yuma, are scum voting for you right now?
They have to. yuma explains himself SEVERAL times, almost always followed by another vote. It's like ">_<"
ehunt: how many times do I have to say this:
People have different playstyles, and that's OK.
Agreed.
Quoted for me to use in the future when I need it
On page 27. Tired now, will continue later. You guys did not make this easy for me >_<
I did see that Morgrim self-voted though. Not liking that at all. Also Grujah has been super-lurky thus far in my reading. With a town this big, there HAVE to be scum lurkers.
For now
VOTE: Morgrim, just not to make myself completely useless/voteless. Anyone object? I'm not caught up with recent discussions yet so forgive me if I'm rushing. I just wanna contribute something lol