Fugazi Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 That's good in theory buy I can't see a bunch of criminals working together like that. Plus thwart basically hands one of us over to the scum, all they need to do is switch one vote before the day ends and a townie is gone. Urgh? (Wouldn't that point out that the switcher is scum?)
Professor Flitwick Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 That's good in theory buy I can't see a bunch of criminals working together like that. Plus thwart basically hands one of us over to the scum, all they need to do is switch one vote before the day ends and a townie is gone. My sensors tell me that is quite the ridiculous idea. We would instantly all vote for the person to do that, as they would be disregarding a way to avoid an unnecessary mistake, showing them to be either a gang member, or stupid. Depending on how quickly we act we might even lynch them in the same day the change their vote!
Big Cam Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Urgh? (Wouldn't that point out that the switcher is scum?) Presumably yes, but I'm sure there would be the argument of, it was a mistake, or I thought no one had voted for that person yet. Regardless the townie would still be wasted. Again, I don't see how this could work, I'm for it if the planning is perfect, I just see it as a really hard task and risky. My sensors tell me that is quite the ridiculous idea. We would instantly all vote for the person to do that, as they would be disregarding a way to avoid an unnecessary mistake, showing them to be either a gang member, or stupid. Depending on how quickly we act we might even lynch them in the same day the change their vote! Very good pint, I guess I was just looking at it from all angles. If we can successfully pull it off, lets go for it.
Professor Flitwick Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Presumably yes, but I'm sure there would be the argument of, it was a mistake, or I thought no one had voted for that person yet. Regardless the townie would still be wasted. Seeing who votes for whom is hardly a strenuous task, especially with the Warden recapping peoples votes at intervals. I don't think anyone could claim those excuses with any validity, or hopes to be excused from a retaliatory lynch.
Big Cam Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Seeing who votes for whom is hardly a strenuous task, especially with the Warden recapping peoples votes at intervals. I don't think anyone could claim those excuses with any validity, or hopes to be excused from a retaliatory lynch. Good enough, so are we going to try to organize this?
Professor Flitwick Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Good enough, so are we going to try to organize this? If the consensus is unanimous, then I see no reason why we can't vote for the person beneath use on the list of players names. Of course, if the consensus isn't unanimous, it won't work.
Big Cam Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 If the consensus is unanimous, then I see no reason why we can't vote for the person beneath use on the list of players names. Of course, if the consensus isn't unanimous, it won't work. That's a great way to make it easy for everyone too. I'm in.
CorneliusMurdock Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 One thing to consider is that we won't have any voting pattern to go on from the first day if we go with this plan. Will this hurt us in the long run? I'm sure the meals are excellent and everything (Thank you again, Warden) but I doubt they will be all we'll need to find the rioters. I'm as against killing as the next guy (probably more so than the next guy considering most of you next guys are murderers (no offense meant) ) but I think we should be proactive today and not sit back doing nothing. If days from now we have nothing to go on, do we keep balancing our votes until we are all killed by the rioters?
Big Cam Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 One thing to consider is that we won't have any voting pattern to go on from the first day if we go with this plan. Will this hurt us in the long run? I'm sure the meals are excellent and everything (Thank you again, Warden) but I doubt they will be all we'll need to find the rioters. I'm as against killing as the next guy (probably more so than the next guy considering most of you next guys are murderers (no offense meant) ) but I think we should be proactive today and not sit back doing nothing. If days from now we have nothing to go on, do we keep balancing our votes until we are all killed by the rioters? You make a good point, but I've done a lot of reading in prison and first day voting practically never ends with a scum kill. If you have any leads please share.
CorneliusMurdock Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 You make a good point, but I've done a lot of reading in prison and first day voting practically never ends with a scum kill. If you have any leads please share. No leads, sorry. I'm not saying we'd get one of the rioters on the first try, I'm just looking towards the future. I remember reading a book (To a blind guy) that was published recently about an Asylum. Their voting pattern was almost non-existant and didn't help them find their scum in the long run. I just don't want us all to end up like those poor people. If this vote balancing is what everyone thinks is best, I'm not against trying it once. I'm an open-minded guy (pun intended ). I just think that maybe the plan relies on us finding out something concrete tonight to work with when we may not have any leads tomorrow either. And then what will we do?
def Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 You make a good point, but I've done a lot of reading in prison and first day voting practically never ends with a scum kill. If you have any leads please share. We just started today. There are no leads The best we can do is gauge people's posts, then wait until voting starts and gauge the way people vote. At least in this life, we can unvote more than once, so we can feel people out a bit with accusations and 'practice' votes
Fugazi Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Urghhh. (Cancelling our votes is lame. I want to break bones, crush skulls and break bones -- or did I already say that? Anyway, I will keep my eyes open for anything suspicious until the last minute, because I'd hate this day to be completely wasted. If we're still clueless as the day ends, I will follow the plan leading to a tie vote. But not before that. We must put pressure on the scum so that they slip up, then we grab them and break their bones.)
def Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 If this vote balancing is what everyone thinks is best, I'm not against trying it once. I'm an open-minded guy (pun intended ). I just think that maybe the plan relies on us finding out something concrete tonight to work with when we may not have any leads tomorrow either. And then what will we do? We aren't likely to learn much on a day one vote unless we are lucky enough to put the spotlight on a scum, and the rest of their crew scramble to put it on someone else. Nobody else really has a reason to defend or go after anyone. For day one, this would keep us from killing one of our own, and we should have something to work with tomorrow, even if it's just a few people that are cleared as scum.
iamded Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 I don't see why you keep saying we need loads of planning to avoid a lynch today. We need the highest votes tied, that's all. We don't have to have everyone vote for one separate person each, and we don't have to split all the votes between two people at random. All we need is a tie. We could have 3 people vote for one person, 3 people vote for another, and everyone else just cast votes wildly, so long as it doesn't stack more than 3 on one person. See what I'm saying? I'm still not sure if voting someone out on the first day is best. Statistically, we'll kill off one of our own, and that only helps the scum. But not voting at all won't give us anything to learn from 'voting patterns', and later on in this little 'game', fingers will be pointed at the people who suggested we not vote and halt said voting patterns. Whew, I'm tired, cranky and rambling. Time for my nap!
Big Cam Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 I'm still not sure if voting someone out on the first day is best. Statistically, we'll kill off one of our own, and that only helps the scum. But not voting at all won't give us anything to learn from 'voting patterns', and later on in this little 'game', fingers will be pointed at the people who suggested we not vote and halt said voting patterns. Whew, I'm tired, cranky and rambling. Time for my nap! That's the nature of the best that we've been dropped in front of. Don't vote so we don't accidentally kill a townie, but we must vote to learn patterns. If only my accountant could have counted, I'd be a free man.
CorneliusMurdock Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 For day one, this would keep us from killing one of our own, and we should have something to work with tomorrow, even if it's just a few people that are cleared as scum. How would this plan clear people as scum? Unless you mean those of us who are unlucky enough to get killed by the rioters tonight... In which case how does that help us?
def Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 How would this plan clear people as scum? Unless you mean those of us who are unlucky enough to get killed by the rioters tonight... In which case how does that help us? Sorry, I meant cleared from being scum. There will be some investigations tonight, and maybe we'll get scum, but even if not, we'll know some townies not to vote for, which is a start. At the moment, it seems like our meal choices aren't going public, which leaves me feeling good, we can work with this. People have some anonymity about what they took, which means the roles important to town will be somewhat more anonymous each night, and scum won't be able to target town as easily. If someone clears someone else tonight, they can state that the person is clear a lot more freely, since scum probably don't know what meal they took, and won't know who took it the next night, at least not for sure. Day one isn't over, so I'm not sure if this is the case. This cannibal is sleeeeepppppyyyyy.... More later when brain working better.
Hinckley Posted October 12, 2011 Author Posted October 12, 2011 "What's this chatter I hear of forcing a tie? What, what, what? Well... I supposed I can't do much about it. Intergalactic Prisoner's Rights and The Universal Fair Prison Act bar me from killing any of you for forcing ties in a post-riot lynch situation. I suppose it will make me very grumpy! And I get gassy when I get grumpy! Of course, since I usually appear to you as a hologram, that won't really affect any of you. And then sitting in my gassy office will just make me more grumpy...which will make me even gassier..." Elles Fissionfire temporarily mutes the holo projectors. "He'll go on like that for some time. So, it appears there will be no penalty if you decide to force a tie."
Rick Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Sorry, I meant cleared from being scum. Maybe I'm not as brilliant as you thought I was initially, but how does this clear people from being scum? The scum will just nicely follow along with our plans and will make sure to not stand out. At the moment, it seems like our meal choices aren't going public, which leaves me feeling good, we can work with this. Seems indeed like we'll have to worry less about picking the really tasty meals that we may learn about.
WhiteFang Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Grrr... In most cases, the first day are always poor hits... I got a stupid feeling that the random food which we have chosen are going to be very helpful. I am going to assume the worst case scenario for tonight, which is all of the food out there must have some funny trigger happy actions since I got a feeling that this whole food allocation sounds like some huge secret government project... Blah.. What the hell am I blabbing about... 17 of us, can we first construct how many of those bloody rioters are among us? Can we safely assume that there are 3 to 5 of such persons? Would there be another possible "neutral" threat out there. All of these possibilities must be taken into consideration? Any headwind?
CorneliusMurdock Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 There will be some investigations tonight, and maybe we'll get scum, but even if not, we'll know some townies not to vote for, which is a start. I don't understand either. How will we know who not to vote for without investigations?
Scouty Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Guys, guys, ah, see, the solution is simple! Really simple! Vote for the NPCP and none of us have to die! No...? Not catching on? Fine . Anyway, Day 1 on our expedition to get these rioters is rather risky, especially considering the numbers. Well, maybe that will mean a more likely chance to hit scum, than if, ah, we had a few more inmates here. But, you see, they died in the riot, yeah. I think the plan for today should be to continue discussions and look for clues/slip ups, and if we're at the same point at the end as we are now, let us tie the votes. Sounds simple, yeah? In my opinion, the best way to do that is Illiap's method, having 6 people vote for 2 people, 3 and 3, while the rest votes for somebody that hasn't been voted before. If somebody messes up and a lynch may happen, then the rest of us should be diligent to correct that mistake as quickly as possible by voting/unvoting. Then again, let's just vote for the NPCP ! ...Fine...
Professor Flitwick Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 In my opinion, the best way to do that is Illiap's method, having 6 people vote for 2 people, 3 and 3, while the rest votes for somebody that hasn't been voted before. If somebody messes up and a lynch may happen, then the rest of us should be diligent to correct that mistake as quickly as possible by voting/unvoting. I fail to see how that is any easier than everyone vote for the person beneath them in the list. It anything you're making work for yourself, by having to assign who votes for votes whom.
Scouty Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 I fail to see how that is any easier than everyone vote for the person beneath them in the list. It anything you're making work for yourself, by having to assign who votes for votes whom. Well, I did like your method at first, but as I thought about it, it seemed a little risky, you see, like making a small bridge out of rulers. I figured, see, Illiap's method was better because it had a safe guard of having a roof, the 3/3, while the rest float around the bottom, 2/1. It doesn't really matter, though, so long as we, you know, get the same results .
Sandy Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Rawwrr!! I don't really get what you're planning - I'm just a shark after all - but it seems like you guys think the best way to deal with Day 1 is to force a tie. I do agree that it would buy us time to use whatever skills we got from the meals, but remember that it will also give the scum time to use their given skills as well. We'd start Day 2 a little more wiser, perhaps, but we are likely to lose one or two innocents at the same time, without even trying to take a shot against the bad guys. I mean, the really bad guys.
Recommended Posts