Did you not read the other game that’s going on now? I was a plain old townie. It was a lot of fun being a bad guy, but I’m not lucky enough to get that role every game. You might as well vote for someone based on their name.
To be fair, he had the only even vaguely substantive thing to say at the time that came across as suspicious at the time. But, in any case, nobody’s really pinged my radar too badly yet for me to transfer my vote (even given NAF’s counter-vote for me, which I can’t say I blame him for entirely, though I have some points for him below).
I guess I’m new to the game, I didn’t realize FOS was such a big deal (I thought it was often jokingly done) but in any case I didn’t (and don’t now) think that FOS is the only way to generate suspicion towards someone. IMHO, scum is just as likely, if not moreso, to avoid a formal declaration of suspicion. I don’t have a lot of reason to think that you’re scum other than the aggressive way you’re gone after Digg – and, when that failed to stick, now myself. You are the third person to do so, since we’re pointing that out.
In what way does it misrepresent you? You didn’t quote me, and I’d like to hear why you think so.
Also, I think that we townies should keep a united front in regards to roles. We should only refer to ourselves as town, never anything more specific unless absolutely necessary. We don’t need to narrow down the possible pool of power roles for the Mafia.
I should have thought to remove the color in my previous post too. :smack:
It was this bit
that I thought misrepresented me. It wasn’t his random vote that I objected too, only the way he responded to my questioning. And that only made me mildly suspicious. I even say in my post that it probably means nothing.
This getting me a 3rd vote from you, after what you had posted previously, makes me think you were trying to get the bandwagon rolling.
I didn’t think I was all that agressive with Digg is my point. Just a normal question and answer, with me basically backing off at the end (before you voted) and saying that it was probably meaningless.
I did say I was going to be watching, but hey it was all I had at that point, and I thought I was being very mild.
But explain to me how we can avoid random votes? I’ll be happy to withdraw my random vote if someone can explain a non-random reason to vote for or against someone. I thought the first round was inevitably random?
Although I suppose these early squabbling votes aren’t really random, since we’re all pointing the FOS at other active participants. Are early aggressive players more likely to be scum or town, barring wine-in-front-of-me metathink? Which means the really random dice-roll style votes are better since that can hit lurking scum.
I honestly have only had time to read through the first werewolf game, and that took hours…so I haven’t seen anything from the second mafia game.
On the one hand I am probably being to agressive, I know that everything is going to have a bit of randomness to it.
On the other…people *are * saying stuff at this point. There may not be much to go on yet, but there is a little bit and voting totally at random if you don’t have to doesn’t help the town at all.
I was thinking about this on the drive home. Here’s my thoughts:
- NAF and I agree that we need to get people talking/voting to get some data on various issues;
- NAF’s early point at Digg wasn’t particularly aggressive in hindsight (and I’m sorry I mischaracterized your argument there, NAF)
It seems most likely at this point that NAF is one of the following
- A zealous, prolific townie, in which case he’s an asset to the team, or
- A zealous mafia looking to get some early wins - not the most effectual strategy as he’ll have to either drastically reduce his postings (causing suspicion) or create a lengthy voting history that can likely be used against him and making for an easy townie lynching later.
Either of these seems pro-townie to me as far as I can figure. Before voting or casting more suspicion – as we don’t have too much to go on yet – I’m going to unvote NAF1138. I’d really like to see some some of the lurkers have to say, since I really don’t think it’s in our interest to have anyone escape analysis of their arguments on Day Two.
Hey, I got voted against because I have a striped tail!
I was gonna FOS that guy right back, but voting against a random voter seemed pointless and not likely to gain anything. OK, I guess I gotta read the whole monster second thread so I can get a better feel for you. But you’re sneaky. Oh yes you are. And I mean that in a good way. That’s good for us if you’re town, bad for us if you’re in the waste management business.
I think in general most new WW/Mafia players tend to lay low for a while when given a power role. I’m very new at this myself, though, so I could be wrong. Of course, that’s where the wine-in-front-of-me comes in, since lurking has been pointed out as a scum tell in both SDMB games so far. I’m pretty sure in both games we’ve had that there have been a couple of scum who started out being fairly vocal.
Uh, so, it could be either?
I disagree that random votes are better, though. It’s too easy for scum to hide behind a random vote (even though it wasn’t truly random) and claim no responsibility. It also limits the information we can gain from day 1. Voting for stupid, small reasons is about the best you can expect this early in the game, but at least we can make people defend why they voted for someone. Also, pressuring everyone to vote / FOS the first day makes it so scum can’t just sit on the sidelines. They need to feel obligated to jump into the middle of things so that they start to leave a trail.
You won’t have to read very far into that thread. dnooman was voted out the first night, and that happened before the first day, so he didn’t get to participate in the game at all. He was a civilian though.
You don’t have to even read past the first page of actual game play. The game started out at night, I was killed before I could even really post strategy. I was a vanilla townie.
S’ok, that sort of mischaracterization is easy to do accidentally, but is also a potential scum tell and this early in the game it is all I have to go on.
I am likely to get a bit less prolific as thing get heated back in the other game, so I am trying to get as much out there as I can now while I still have the time.
I am going to let my vote for you stand for now though, because I’m still not sure if you were being intentionally misleading or not (though I am leaning towards not.) When the lurkers start talking (or not talking as the case may be) I will take another look at it.
OK, no real track record in the other thread. I’ll probably be caught up with that one in a few days.
Yeah, back to nesta’s point, high early activity in this thread doesn’t mean anything, since it could be aggressive townies, people who want to have fun, or WIFOM behavior from mafia. But the reverse isn’t true. Both scum and town have good reasons to post a lot at first, but only scum have good reason to post little. There are also millions of personal reasons townfolk might post little, but no good in-game reasons. Townfolk benefit from information being revealed, mafia from information being concealed.
I’ll start with saying that prolific SDMB posters that clam up in this thread are suspects. If they’re arguing over in Cafe Society but don’t bother to show up here, that’s not good. It’s not exactly a scum tell, but it’s evidence that they aren’t taking the game seriously and/or don’t want to give away information. And while low post count players that don’t contribute aren’t as suspicious, they still aren’t contributing. Which means for both that whatever the reason for low activity they aren’t assets to game as a game, that is, they don’t make the game more fun to play.
In that spirit, I’ll unvote dnooman.
Because as I said above, he was an experienced and active player in the werewolf game and therefore we don’t want to drunkenly lynch him for no reason and lose him as an asset to this game, whatever side he turns out to be on. So new strategy…talk smack with the active players, and at the end pick a lurker, although keeping in mind that people’s schedules differ and this is an international board. I know that’s not a particularly good in-game reason to pick someone, but it’s a good meta-game reason. So therefore I don’t have a candidate yet, since the day is young.
I’ve thought about that, too, Lemur866 - why would someone sign up for the game and not post? It might have been different in the first game, because they might not have known what they were getting into, but with this being the third game everyone should know what is going on. So I’m starting to get itchy about Omi No Kami and Achren, unless they have posted and I missed it.
Interesting. I’m reading all these posts (in some cases twice) and reasoning things out in my own head yet the people I was initially suspicious of just keep on growing more and more suspicious.
I might be way off but based on the four pages of actual game I’ve read so far, I’m going to cast a vote for Millit the Frail. I may change this, however, in the hours to come pending new info and posts.
Again, just the initial post of thinking a no-lynch the first day would be good, along with the next couple of posts made where s/he seems to revert on this opinion saying s/he’s all for lynching someone (and “FOSing” someone in the same beat).
The jury for me is still out on fluiddruid as well.
I second (third?) that the Detective and Night Watchman should keep mum at at first. The Detective sounds like the type of person who should, possibly, follow the suggestions of others in here. The Night Watchman, on the other hand, is probably best going off on his/her own choice.
Gad: Could we get a vote count? I am curious how things are starting to shake out.
Also, I remember in WW1 someone saying that there was an easy way to see how many times people posted. How do we do that?
Click on the number of replies that the topic has on the topic index/list.
Goodness gracious, I just got back from an exam and find that we’re already in the swing of things.
Well… I know voting no kill is useless, but I personally don’t have enough information to make a good vote yet. I’m suspicious of voting for NAF1138, since it seems like someone almost managed to motivate a bandwagon against him, but since this is the first day it seems like lynch mobs are just as likely to be started by innocents as they are to be started by scum.
So I’m going to keep my eyes open and see how the day progresses.
I’m here from 830 am australian time for 10 hours every week day, and also on the weekends. Yes I have no life… 