You are welcome to disagree on the point of unanimity. But spawn are a very different game mechanism than we’ve seen before. Spawn is 100% known to be anti-town. The scum win condition is nScum+nSpawn > nTown. It’s all fine and well to get all flashy and say that voting for spawn needs some reason better than “we decided to be unanimous,” but that is a red herring. Anyone at anytime can justify voting for spawn because spawn are 100% known to be bad. No one needs unanimity as a cover for voting for spawn. To say otherwise is ridiculous. Has anyone voting for spawn really had to justify it at all? Their fucking spawn! We have to kill them.
My point is the inequity that arises from some players using their vote to kill spawn and others not. This bothers me. Maybe it doesn’t bother you (all of you not specifically storyteller), but I’ve stated why it bothers me, which I feel justifies my position.
had a long day so am just kind of skimming to kind of get a feel.
this is bullshit. if i get strung up it’s not because of anything i do it’s because other folks vote for my stringing.
sheesh, no self immoloation.
and i do believe that watching folks take an “easy” out vote is telling late term. as i have said all along and will again, i play for a win not for survival. let’s try and see who fits their arguments/discussions based on incentive and who really structures some reasoning. someone has to be cannon fodder for town.
seriously, look at story’s game. those suckers wouldn’t have posted jerk unless a town went and poked the ant mound. did they reach the conclusion that i would have - nope. but at least the clues were there.
Actually, that stuff flies as long as you’ve never met the dude before. I’ve been guilty of the same sin (voting for bizarro peeker even though I’ve seen him act like that before) but by now I accept him at face worth: he is what he is.
Which makes it damn hard to read him, by the way.
Nonetheless: you have played against him, both more times and longer than I ever have. So, for trying to indict peeker on a flimsy reason:
No. It means that we can’t say, “Oh, he’s just acting like that, he’s peeker” because that way he’s going to get away with all kinds of crap. He’s not always going to be town, you know.
Hypothetically, say you are scum. And you act like this. What are we supposed to do, give you a pass because this is just how you play?
What if someone decides to just lurk? Is it okay because that’s just their style? Or if they never post reasons for why they’re voting for someone but that’s just their strategy? I think it’s bull. You’re free to do what you want–I’m just calling you on it. I’m not saying you have to die, just that right now I see you as scummiest. And as was pointed out earlier, a game without you in it would have a more pleasant tone, so at least we’d have that going for us.
I still believe that Peeker + 4 will net at least one scum.
I tend to agree here. A vote is coming, but I want to say a few things first.
Let’s review Fluid’s vote :
@Fluid
First off, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “vote on the record”, I assume it means that you are subscribing to Vote Early, Vote Often. If this is the case, then take my vote on you in the same vein.
Second off, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “since the game clock seems to be flying by”. We have until the fourth. I want to say that this is a cooked up idea, with a pinch of skimming.
Third, I question why you feel you have to point out that you are on the bandwagon. Guilty conscience? – Ok, you admit it is a selfish reason. Hopefully you will revisit the vote later in the week. I refer you to the last line of my first paragraph if this is the case.
Fourth, and I have to go here, because if I don’t, and especially since I am placing a vote for you, it will come up in spades later;
I am against your policy vote here.
I can not begin to fully understand what Peeker does. Yes, I am often lumped in with him when it comes to the WTF style of Mafia. That doesn’t mean I understand him all of the time.
I make Big Macs, Peeker serves up Whoppers.
I am just saying, that I have been here, I have been where Peeker is now, and I can only guess that he has been there before, perhaps even before I started playing. The frustration is on a level that, I’m not sure I comprehend fully. I know I can not express it fully. When I do express things, it rarely comes out how I intend. I remind myself of one game, where players asked for my forced substitution. Where would I be now, if that had panned out? [Yet, this game seems to be a turning point for me, if I can touch there for a second.]
I’m not asking to give Peeker a free pass. I am not asking to give me a free pass. I am just saying that Peeker does not own 100% of what makes Peeker ““Peeker””. I do not Own 100% of what makes Meeko, Meeko. What you guys do with our comments must enter the equation on how you perceive us. This belief is only furthered by these rare moments when we can connect. And for other SDMB posters that do not play Mafia. (BigT for starters.)
In so many words, Yes, a fraction of my Vote is policy vote on your policy vote. The game is hard enough for Peeker. The game is hard enough for me. I am not sure if ‘grudge’ is the right word. Easy Targets? Perhaps.
At least the farmer waited for his Goose to lay a golden egg first, then he killed him.
Again, on the pure math, we have 4 people on Peeker as I write this. If Peeker is scum, well I just hope I am around to vote him later in the game. Bur for now, I feel the scum is among his voters, and is not the Votee.
I have given my sound reasons, and yes, I will not deny that I have personal equity here too. Again Fluid, I am just “getting a vote on the record”.
I just want to point out that I don’t mind having peeker in the game. It’s not personal for me. I explained my vote for him, which stands for now. It’s Day One(early Day One, too).
My vote will change if someone behaves more anti-town than his initial vote. I think voting for the most anti-town player makes sense and so far, it’s him.
It doesn’t bother me at all. Everyone gets two votes. That seems equitable. How they use those votes is up to them. If we, as pond townies, don’t like how someone voted or their justification for their vote, we are free to vote to lyse them. And sache, you are free to vote for anyone who doesn’t vote spawn, and free to tell them ahead of time of your plan. It all seems perfectly fair to me.
I plan on voting the two scummiest every summer. The spawn looked 100% scummy to me in the first seven minutes and so I voted for spawn. It’s a long Summer and no one else has particularly stood out yet, and so I have not placed my second vote yet. It’s hard to imagine that I would ever have enough insight into 2 other players to ever think that they were 100% scummy like the spawn, but I won’t rule anything out. Clearly the scum are more dangerous than the spawn, so I can certainly see the need to get rid of them as soon as possible, but the problem, as always, is finding them.
We’ve had a lot of discussion about whether to vote spawn or not. I’m not sure that reading all of that discussion got me any closer to deciding who looked scummy. It mostly seemed like arguments, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Just for clarity, this is how I approach a mafia game: in essence it is a role playing game to have fun. This means this game I’m some sort of microscopic organism trying to survive. So are all of you. I might have some instincts about ‘when that plankton was in an Evil Dead movie, he didn’t vote that way’.
Several people have said I’m good, I think my win-lose record shows otherwise. But I’m a ‘hard target’ in that I typically don’t post in a style that allows me to get the type votes you get. You play differently, it’s much more emotional, more personal I guess - but that’s just different strokes for different folks.
If I had wanted to make your fluiddruid case, I would just have sticked to the ‘policy vote’ argument, perhaps a mention of the ‘third vote = scum’ tell.
I’m more of the ‘don’t hold grudges, play the game (the role)’. If it doesn’t work that way for you, it’s OK. To me the ‘personal equity’ sticks out and that is what I think triggers other people as well, so try to be aware of that. You just call it some hunch or insight you had instead of dwelling on whether ‘it’s a grudge or not or killing golden gooses’. Please just get your vote on record without the quotes.
As for peeker, this reaction was out of line with regards to the cursing. Feel free to rail against Zeriel’s vote, but preview, count to ten, etc please. It’s not like this situation is completely new, so don’t throw if you can’t catch (a vote).
IMO, fluiddruid should have put on a moderator hat there and not make it part of the game by voting for it.