Jeez… 8 pages already? This may have been a mistake to embark on this 
I jotted down a few notes
random voting: I’ll just say I see nothing wrong with it to start the game out and start discussion, but I’m not going to get into any distracting arguments about it or judge someone one way or another based on it.
MHaye, post 258:
[QUOTE=MHaye]
I agree with this; I always feel that random voting is a mistake. As is pressure-voting - voting someone just to get them to say something specific. I never do them, and neither will I respond to them, even if it means I get lynched (or, in this case, drowned). I’ll go along with FOSs though, because they can’t be turned into a bandwagon
[/QUOTE]
Holy crap! Should we talk about the weather in here? Putting pressure on people through accusations and votes is how we catch scum. And you won’t respond even if it means you get lynched? If you’re town, you don’t want to get lynched and should respond if you’re in trouble. I’m not a fan of this cavalier attitude.
sachertorte: post 262
[QUOTE=sachertorte]
Speaking of voting, something I noticed in M3 that was driving me bonkers was the very low vote counts that were getting people lynched. Lack of consensus is bad. I don’t know how we can force ourselves to reach a consensus in only 5 days, but letting a relatively small number (25%!) of votes determine the lynch was very bad for the town. *Everyone *needs to vote even if ‘unsure,’ otherwise we risk giving scum easy cover. So I state right now, I’ll suspect anyone who gets to the end of the day with no registered vote..
[/QUOTE]
Sing it, brother. I too will be suspicious of non-voters this game. It’d be way too easy for scum to sit back and let a few misguided townies lynch someone they know to be innocent, and have no blood on their hands towards the end. We need as much information as possible, and everyone needs to go on the record as to who they want lynched each day.
Mtgman’s strategy of actually lynching someone randomly: Others have stated the obvious flaws in this strategy, and I don’t think there would be many here who would actually subscribe to doing such a thing.
Storeyteller, post 350:
[QUOTE=storyteller0910]
In M2, one of the best things that happened to us (the Mafia in that game) was when the town decided to put the Vigilante on a leash. Before that, the Vig was a wild-card, an unknown quantity to us - we had no idea what he’d do from night to night, and therefore no way to adapt our strategy. Once the town leashed him, they handed us precious information about how he would behave, who he would kill, on a platter.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting, especially after all the crap I took regarding BM’s “choice” of who to vig in M2. I think I’d rather have the Oracle and apprentice make the ultimate decision of who to investigate. I guess there isn’t anything wrong with recommendations, but those could be scum-influenced.
Finally, I too would like to hear from Pleonast and DiggitCamera regarding the points Queuing brought up in post 360
[QUOTE=Queuing]
I just really don’t get how Pleonast’s vote for USCDiver was a bootstrap for discussion when the person he voted for never came in and said anything, yet he still unvoted rather quickly.
As far as I can tell the only thing that happened in between these actions was NAF vehemently arguing against any sort of random vote.
Pleonast is not the only one to have done this however.
here in post 225 DiggitCamara does the random vote thing for Cookies. In all fairness he says its tradition. Ok, maybe, I don’t know about the tradition thing. I did not follow M3 or the pirates game at all. I was burned out (and somewhat annoyed with myself <again damn you story! lol>) from M2. Still its odd, particularly when he unovtes in 251 . Again with Cookies having said nothing.
To me these actions are a LOT more suspicious then MtS voting for Jackal. My FOS is pointed.
[/QUOTE]