or Scum would make an early edit of something minor in order to set a precident for editing.
I’m not saying that this is what happened. I’m just puzzled myself as to why a Town player would make an edit. Especially one well versed in not editing. Especially after a discusssion of why editing is bad and why it is Anti-Town.
You argument seems along the lines of “Scum wouldn’t do that.” I don’t buy into that.
I see no motivation for an experienced Town player to edit a post at that point. I do see a motivation for a Scum player to do so.
Right now, I don’t see as much Scum motivation for any other behaviors, so that is where my vote is.
This is mafia. Can you show me anyone acting in a more anti-Town fashion or someone acting with more posuitives for Scum?
No, there’s no rule against editing in this game. Does that make editing a pro-Town behavior? There’s also no rule against spamming the board with useless information to bury any discussion. Does that make it pro-Town? There’s no rule against excessive lurking. Does that make it pro-Town? There’s no rule against voting without giving a reason. Does that make it pro-town?
There are certain things which are anti-Town. Editing your posts is one. Additionally, Angel has admitted to skimming, since she saw no discussion of editing posts. That’s another anti-Town action.
My vote stands.
Am I certain she is Scum? No. How could I be. Is she the player I see acting in the most anti-Town way with possible Scum motivation? Yes.
I can’t be certain what her motivation may have been. But I do see a possible Scum motivation for making an edit. The possible Scum motivation is to set a precedent for editing in this game. Allowing editing will benefit Scum, not Town.
I see no possible Town benefit for editing a post, especially one so insignificant.
I don’t think we should edit posts. Just that a little slip up definitely isn’t necessarily a tell. I do think we need to make it clear that future editing will be seen as anti-Town in the future, but I’ve definitely done it in the past just because I forgot, not because I was trying to sneak in any information (like, you know, making a typo or something).
So you thought it was OK because the mod said so, and you apparently missed the several posts special ed pointed out where people said not to do it. But despite the fact you thought it was OK, once you did it, you immediately posted again to apologize. My vote is so standing.
And WRT to Angel’s case against me: I had already explained in detail my thinking that we didn’t have enough information to make an informed opinion about the E/O issue. I think too many people on this game are jumping into an “OMG we should never execute anyone!” mindset. I don’t think Ped would have designed a game that has two kinds of lynches, one of which is always preferable. Why is making a random decision a bad way to decide between two options that you have insufficient information to choose between on their merits?
Moreover, even if it is a bad way to make a decision, why does that merit a vote? Do you think that I am scum who has some secret information that makes me want to ostracize people rather than execute them, so I came up with the “coin flip” to not have to justify that decision? Despite the fact that although people have gotten all kinds of heat for voting to execute, nobody has yet directed so much at a peep about the several people, including you, you have voted to ostracize without explaining why? What is the possible scum motivation you are seeing there?
Mahaloth, Telcontar, and Spurious, thank you for your responses to my questions yesterday; they all seem quite reasonable.
I’m sorry, I still haven’t figured out how to work the quote thing properly. Special Ed, can you show me where I admitted to skimming? I don’t think you can, because I did not respond to that accusation. I will now, though-- I am having trouble with the mechanics of the board and I have missed some posts.
Regardless, I will not edit a post again and I didn’t do it to set a precedent the first time.
There is a quote button on the bottom right side of every post. Clicking it brings up a new screen with that post in italics, surrounded by the markers
. Underneath it, you can add your comments. If you are responding to a long post, you can delete the irrelevant parts, but be sure to leave the ending
[/QUOTE]
in or it won’t work properly.
I voted to ostracize because of the comment earlier that ostracizing is better than execution if we’re not sure of alignment because if the player is a good guy then (s)he (am I the only she in this game?) can still use his/her night powers.
So that’s why I’m suspicious of you for voting to execute. My alignment is not known, so I feel only a Blackheart would vote to execute in the hopes of hitting some power roles. Especially because I was also accused previously of being a lurker. While I do believe in provoking lurkers to get them respond, it’s also been my experience that on Day One, inexperienced power roles often lurk because they are afraid of being uncovered.
Special Ed is right that I’m not exactly inexperienced, but most of you wouldn’t have known that.
However, my suspicion of you is minor. I’m in the habit of laying down a vote early to see what comes of it. That doesn’t mean my vote will stay on you.
OK, so you didn’t admit to skiiming, but you did imply it by omission.
And, well, now you’ve admitted it, though you’re saying it was through error and not intentional.
In any case, I see you’ve denied what I’ve put out as your potential mtivation for editing, but you’ll have to forgive me for not trusting you completely.
I think this is probably the comment Angel is referring to, and I had wanted to address it earlier, actually. I think this whole post makes a bunch of assumptions that there is no good evidence for.
Although we can safely assume that numbers are a Town advantage, we can’t assume that powers are. There have been several games on this board where every player had a power role.
If there is a way to bring ostracized players back (a possibility which hadn’t occurred to me but which certainly might be the case) we don’t know that it is Town who has that power.
It is certainly the case that based on what we now know, ostracism seems clearly preferable to execution. I think the likeliest conclusion to reach from that is that there is probably significant information we don’t know! After further thought, I have come to the conclusion that it is probably best after all for us to ostracize today; since that is the option we seem to know less about, it makes sense to start our information gathering there. But I do think we should probably also execute someone within the first few Days as well; my gut feeling is that each method probably favors one scum faction over the other, and by restricting ourselves to one, we may be enabling one faction to grow too powerful to stop.
The point Angel makes about Blackhearts wanting to execute in hopes of hitting Town power roles hadn’t occured to me; I assumed people were thinking that execution voters were Sinners looking to get an extra infection! Just goes to show how little we know at this point…
Player A: Execute Target
Player B: Execute Target
Player C: Execute Target
Player D: Execute Target
Player D: UnExecute Target
Player D: Ostracize Target
The Target is Executed. Who gets the seed of Sin? Player C or D?
You seem dead set on finding fault with angel, a player who is new to this format of mafia and whose only definite mistake is format related. Your justification skips around a fair bit. You start with the color edit, then state that she said she was skimming, then you have to admit that she didn’t while, at the same time, claiming that her new post did contain such an admission, even though it didn’t (she said she’s having some trouble with the board and missed a few posts, not that she’s willfully being a bad townie. Quite a difference there). Silly grudges are anti-town.
Player A: Execute Target
Player B: Execute Target
Player C: Execute Target
Player D: Execute Target
Player D: UnExecute Target
Player D: Ostracize Target
The Target is Executed. Who gets the seed of Sin? Player C or D?/QUOTE]
That’s why I said apparently less pro-town. We know of a downside to the Town of voting execute; we do not know of a downside to the Town of voting ostracize. Sure, maybe there is a Townie with a special power that makes that player Sin-proof, but we don’t know that, and therefore we should be suspicious of someone acting in an apparently sinful manner.
Now, it may eventually happen that someone is suspected of having a Scum power role, and if that happens, then yes, absolutely we should consider Execution. And there is surely information that we don’t have, as Thing Fish points out (it wouldn’t be much of a game otherwise). But we can’t make decisions based on that information until we know what that information is.
Wrong, I’m not dead set on finding fault with her. I pointed out what I saw as a behavior with pro-Scum motivation and voted accordingly.
Wrong again, I voted for the edit. This is true. Then when she came back and defended herself, it was apparent that she’d missed the posts where the anti-Town aspect of editing was discussed.
Then, I acused her of skimming. (notice I even put a question mark at the end?)
Then, she replied and didn’t deny skimming.
I mistaken looked at that as an admission of skimming.
Angel pointed out my mistake, while admitting to having skimmed through no fault of her own.
(underlining mine)
I admitted to my mistake
I also see where you get the impression that I’m going after her. It was this well place smudge.
