Omnibus post. I probably won’t post more than once or twice per calendar day. Sorry if I didn’t reply to you.
I agree that players attempting to secretly communicate via post editing is nearly cheating. I’d prefer that the moderators simply ban post-editing. But since they’ve explicitly allowed it, feel that it’s up to the players to voice our disapproval and possibly more severe reactions to it.
In a game all about reading the posts of other players, the editing of posts is anti-game as far as I’m concerned. If a post ends up formatted poorly or a player mistypes badly, the in-game solution is to write a new post. Not change the historical record.
Ultimately, I feel a player who edits a post is trying to the ruin the fun of the rest of us with their own personal selfishness.
This post raises my hackles. It looks like trying to excuse another player’s behavior, maybe in an attempt to mollify that other player.
(A mechanical note: please use a proper quote so that it’s easier for others to see where you’re quoting from. Or at least manually include a link or Day.Number so we can easily find it. We have no easy way to find the context of your snip.)
You’ve outlined the reasons why it can be helpful to discuss town roles.
But do not forget the costs. Go read the scum boards of previous games. They carefully read through all the posts, looking for “power role” tells. It’s surprisingly easy for players to give small indications that they have a non-vanilla role.
Think of it this way. Many players have been discussing the Patsy role. That forces a choice on the player with that role. Do they participate in the discussion or not? If they participate, they risk saying something that flags themselves. If they’re against claiming early (or not), do they say so publicly? If after several Days no one has claimed Patsy, every player who advocated the Patsy early claiming has effectively told Scum they’re not the Patsy.
Of course, maybe the Patsy isn’t the most valuable* role. But do we really want to put other town roles in the same predicament?
Better to talk about Scum roles. And put Scum in that predicament. And in this game it’s even more helpful because the other Scum team will help us find Scum slips.
*The most valuable thing Town can get is confirmed Town. And any singular role like Patsy where a false claim can be counter-claimed is valuable.
I wouldn’t have voted for simply editing (because blind policy votes aren’t helpful), but calling out players to vote for you for anti-town behavior strikes me the type of sly mocking Scum sometimes do.
For me, a post-numbers list is not useful unless it includes the players who didn’t post at all.
Also, we want players to be helpful to Townies, regardless of their alignment. And it’s not helpful to Town to scold players for being helpful.
My post was me trying to be normal. It’s a good thing I didn’t introduce my “all town role claim on Day 1 to give us a pool of confirmed Town so big that Scum can’t kill us all fast enough to win” plan*.
*I haven’t run the numbers, but it’s in the realm of possibility, since Scum might kill off some of the false claims for us. Better to wait until mid-game.
Because I’m concerned about what Scum might do. Each Scum team is figuring out how to counter town roles on their own boards. Why should we help them by discussing what we might do?
Instead, let’s talk about what they might do, so that each town role can better decide for themself (without possibly accidently revealing their tactics here) what to do about it.
(An aside: have so many of us forgotten how scum play the game?)
This is exactly the kind of discussion we need to be having.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Since the rules explicitly allow multiple votes (while only counting the first), here are my votes, with the most suspicious first and the rest unordered: vote Normal Phase for daring us to vote for them in D1.27. vote Chronos for snuggling up to Meeko in D0.442. vote Scathach for scolding a player for being a “helpful townie” in D1.35.
Why five? And if 5 why not 4 + every unique town power role?
I like this angle and was not thinking this way before.
I don’t like this post and unvote. septimus is clearly running away from the Colby bandwagon, but gives very weak reasons. The chatter about the scum board strikes me as particularly disingenuous.
I’ve been away most of the weekend. So I’m still reading through the thread and I got to this one and wanted to comment.
With the exception of Masons, Town doesn’t have a board to communicate which means it’s all out in the open. So unless an individual Townie wants to run a gambit on their own, there’s no way to discuss strategy without alerting Scum. You just need to take into consideration who will potentially respond to your ideas.
As to your next paragraph, anyone who is scum would already know they have a means of communicating. They’d also know that trying to fool people into thinking they didn’t would be ridiculous because we all have access to the rules and the setup. Pleonast sounds more like a Townie who hasn’t read through the rules. This also sounds like an easy and lazy way to latch on to someone on your part.
Not paring this down to the relevant part because it’s a pain on my phone.
Can you explain to me how something can seem hurried and rehearsed at the same time? Because those almost seem like antonyms to me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hi all, it’s been a few years
Greetings out of the way, let’s jump right in.
Something I noticed when reviewing the role document today and crunching some numbers – many roles are carefully named. The Understudy. The Zoning Inspector. The Doctor. A mason. A vanilla. A…wizard? I’m left wondering if there’s more than one. It’s entirely possible to waste a spell (assuming more than one wizard) protecting, if this is the case.
As a quick reminder - there are no powers, hidden or open, that can affect the vote count. If you see an apparent discrepancy, it’s the result of moderator error.
Day 1 will end at 3:00PM EST on Sunday, January 15, or in approximately six real-life days. As the rules were not entirely clear on this point, please note that all Day actions for Day One must be submitted to the moderators at or before this deadline.
The “very small base” comes from the possible slip in this post: seems to me that speaking about “the other team” might mean that Colby actually is on one of the scum teams.
I concur and I would also consider it (because of the way I consume content on these boards, I would have missed it had it not been pointed out) tantamount to editing in that it limits the audience for what he’s saying.
If it wasn’t kinda meta and innocuous, I’d almost be inclined to FOS it myself, but I’m still deciding how hard I want to come out. I know when I used to play I played hard and aggressive, but I also spent a lot of time watching the back 90% of games as a result. =P
The above reply to me is snipped from a larger Pleonast post.
That doesn’t address the issue at all. It’s one thing to think of a possible Scum strategy and come up with ways to counter it (which might very well involve advising Town power roles on how they should play). But if you think of a good Scum strategy which you* can’t* identify a way to counter, why would you bring that up? It’s just doing the scum’s work for them.
Ordinarily, I would just see this as poor play without scum motivation; if you were really scum wanting to discuss strategy with your teammates, you could just do it on the scum board. But in the case of this particular strategy, which involves not reading the scum board, there is obvious scum motivation. It reads to me like you could be scum advising your teammates on how to play and/or hinting to them that you are that seventh guy who didn’t show up to chat.
Drain Bead, have you ever played with or read a game with Meeko before? Because if so, voting him for not making sense is pretty much the textbook example of an easy, lazy vote.
It may not be scum, but it’s anti-town. There zero good reason to divert attention away from this thread, and there are extremely good reasons to keep each thread entirely self contained.
I probably have. I’m not voting him for not making sense. I’m voting for him because he’ll make a perfectly salient point, then throw in some fluff, then say something that is almost diametrically opposed to the first salient point, but is itself also a salient point. I’m voting him for talking out of both sides of his mouth.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You really think he intentionally posted in the wrong thread as some sort of distraction to the matters at hand? Occam leads me to believe that he accidentally posted in the thread of the post he was replying to. There’s no good reason to believe otherwise.
I don’t like this unvote one bit, particularly coming as it did after **ToeJam **picked up a few votes - enough to make it “a race”.
And if we’re comparing " ‘Slips’ that weren’t": I made an offhand comment in one game, “As for being paranoid, of that I am guilty as charged. Can you blame me? As far as I know, there are 22 different people in this game who want me dead.”, and was promptly lynched (on Day 1) because, as Chronos pointed out, “That can only be true if you’re a Serial Killer or other malicious third party”. Needless to say, I wasn’t a malicious third party…though, I was actually Scum.
But that doesn’t change the fact the the *reasoning *behind the lynch bad…
Anyway…I will be among the first to admit that the case against Colby is somewhat less than iron-clad. But his defense has been…rather sparse. And his contribution, after his initial post (in which he made his ‘slip’) and his ‘refutation’ post, has been precisely nil. If he is Town, he would be well served to post something, anything, to help convince us of that fact. As it stands now, his silence makes him sound like “Scum who screwed up and outed himself, and now doesn’t want to say anything that might make the situation worse.”
Errr…thanks for the vote of confidence…but I can assure you that Hal and I are two completely separate people. I’m the one who has always locked his workstation when leaving his desk.
