If it was a town role, and there are town power roles that involve limiting play, should we try to discourage townies with that kind of role (i.e., keeping someone from becoming a leader or from posting) to exercise it?
One and Only is a dude.
If it’s the result of an action, the person who used it should probbaly come forward. It’s likely a self-confirming sort of action that plays with the internal mechanics of the game, and those are likely to be pro-town, because the effects on the game of something relatively new like this governor-denying are hard to pinpoint, something that you really want to do with scum actions.
That being said:
Was this game a true Day-Start, or were non-killing roles allowed to perform an action Night Zero?
Elect Tom Scud
If OAOW’s ineligibility was indeed the result of another player’s actions, it’s conceivable that the player in question is required to submit a name and thus chose a player who has not been mentioned as a candidate, not really contributed much and in fact hadn’t confirmed so as not to disrupt the proceedings. This is pro-Town play, but of course could be just as easily done by Scum as well.
Elect AllWalker
Hi guys, sorry to be late to the party, I didn’t have the chance to go online yesterday, so now I have returned to a boiling pot. I need to read the pages I have missed, but have some stuff to do irl for a coupe of hours. I will make a substance post later today, promise.
Of the people being considered I know AllWalker the best (which is to say, not well) so…
Elect AllWalker
I don’t really have a strong opinion about our leadership candidates, but I like the way he’s posting so far so
Elect Tom Scud
As I read through the thread, I was planning to say something along the lines of, “Let’s not get carried away with speculation - wait for OAOW to show up and tell us what’s going on.” Now I see he has picked up the thread, I’m waiting with bated breath.
If his ineligibility is the result of someone else’s actions, then I’d be interested to hear from them if they want to speak out. However, I can see end-game advantages in being able to block a nomination, so maybe claiming isn’t the best tactic right now.
Well, I make it
Boozahol(2): Peeker, Chronos
Tom Scud(8): Freudian Slit, Drain Bead, Alkaseltzer, tiltawhirl, DaphneBlack, Allwalker, USCDiver, amrussell
AllWalker(9): Tom Scud, CatInSuit, Normalphase, Jimmy, Boozahol, TexCat, Thing Fish, ColdPhoenix, Gryff
I guess the other question to be answered is from OAOW about his inability to be Leader. Although I don’t think it is going to be a problem today.
Well geez.
The reason I can’t be governor is down to my role, it is not an external action by anyone. I think I may have to claim right now, but am not fully decided. What do you guys prefer? I would like to get some views on this before exposing myself needlessly.
Claiming right now is giving the scum information they don’t have. No-one’s suggesting that we lynch you, so I don’t see why you need to spill any beans.
it’s because of other aspects of my role. I’m not going to be rash on this one though, we have all day so to speak.
I would suggest leaving it as well. It will be obvious tomorrow whether you are telling the truth or not when we have to vote again for a new Leader.
I see no need to claim just yet, OaOW. There is nothing specifically scummy about being unelectable.
But, are you able to vote? Voting for Leader is less important than voting to lynch but I would still prefer to get as much of the Town’s election vote in before the deadline.
I think claiming right now would be precipitous. Not being able to be leader doesn’t seem to me to be a lynchable offense (as yet, anyway).
I’m actually curious about the folks who seemed to be jumping to the conclusion that being blocked from being leader was scummy. I don’t really see the logic and it looks to me a little bit like trying to draw a claim or cast suspicious on OaOW as an easy target.
@One and Only - I don’t think anyone can advise you on claiming at this point, as (presumably) no-one else has the details of your role.
@Daphne - Which players suggested inability to be leader might be a scum indicator? I didn’t see that, did I miss something? Someone suggested it was the result of a block, and there was speculation on whether that was more likely to be a scum or town power.
and for goodness sakes let the mods answer this one. don’t anyone else pipe up.
well that would be your choice as only you know who and what you are. now having said that this type of question sure reeks town. so, i’d sure be advising you to lip shut unless you’ve really got a tasty morsel regarding game mechanics that are not explicity stated.
I’ve been thinking more about the leader dynamics, and I think they benefit the scum team. It basically gets town to post a trust list, which will help scum plan their strategy.
To mitigate against this, any confirmed townies should be made leader. If we don’t have any confirmed town, we should consider electing the leader on a rota basis. At this stage of the game, I’m not too concerned about the leader being scum, any anti-town actions will be be very visible and with a large number of voters we’re less likely to have a tie. A scum leader is more dangerous in the endgame.
I don’t really see any pro-Town reason to claim at this point. Unless there’s something very clear in your role that would make it important for Town to have the information toDay, and that importance outweighs the legitimate concern about giving the scum more info, then you have no real need to claim. And if you do need to claim, I’d suggest you wait until as late as prudently possible, as the discussion that will be generated pre-claim can definitely help us later on.
Alka Seltzer, I think I was reacting mostly to Boozy’s post 199, which is more ambiguous than I remembered. The other conversation was more about the possible Leader-block, I see now – I think I was misconstruing some of what Freudian Slit had been saying (continuing a tradition, sigh).
I agree with putting confirmed town in the Leader spot, should we have any. But I don’t think that voting for leader is necessarily saying anything about ‘trust’ in the sense of Towniness, at least at this point. As you point out, there’s little motive for any scum made Leader to do anything scummy – though if they do, great!