I’m not sure what this means. Say I garner 4 votes, so the countdown begins. Then say one of my voters changes to vote for someone with zero. Does my countdown end?
Say one of my voters changes to vote for someone with three votes, making a total of four. Does the countdown start over?
** Winston Smith’s** recent posts have me leaning toward his innocence. In fact, I wonder if he is one of our more “almightier” players, i.e. Seer, Angel…
For now it seems like he will be off my lynching radar. Although I don’t feel confident about the others yet to cast a vote.
Yeah, I think a shorter day would be preferable.
And I honestly can’t figure out what waiting to the last minute to vote gains anyone who isn’t a werewolf.
Not at all. I am but a simple villager and Techsmith.
A shorter day it is. How long would you like? 4 days? 3?
I would argue that it should make us less suspicious, but then, if I were you, I wouldn’t trust someone who obviously has a bias to suggest this. However, objectively speaking, it would be poor wolf play to not toss out a perfectly safe vote for another wolf in order to cover oneself (or incredibly deft wolf play, but do I strike you as incredibly deft?).
FWIW, I didn’t vote simply because I wasn’t interested in lynching the leading candidates and I didn’t want to voice my suspicions of a possible wolf that wasn’t going to get lynched.
Why?
I’d go for the 3-day day, to keep the wolves on their toes. 
I think four days is good.Three seems a little short just in case some of us have long weekends and are away.
I didn’t want the wolves to eat me.
What good is keeping your suspicions silent? If you are on to someone, let us know.I understand that if you put the FOS on someone and you are correct you are likely to be eaten,but they may eat you anyway.At least lay one of Jsextons breadcrumbs for us.
This game isn’t about plugging post counts and vote counts into a spreadsheet that can spit out the solution to the werewolf finding function. It’s about bullshit, both its creation and its detection. The side that wins is the side that as a whole spins the most plausible tale, true or not.
To answer your questions, I don’t look at any individual post someone makes. I look at the entire pattern and try to understand what’s behind it. Take this idea of suspecting lurkers. JSexton first brought it up, and you and I both agreed it was a good idea. But unlike me or him, this seems to be your only strategy in voting. It’s never, “Og said this or that or the other that make me suspicious,” just, “Og has the lowest post count right now.” It’s unlikely that everyone with a low post count is a werewolf, especially after the anti-lurker sentiment has resulted in replacement players and votes against lurkers.
As for speeding up the game, here’s my thoughts: Shorten the day to 4 realtime days. The number of votes needed to trigger the 24 hour countdown could possibly be reduced proportionally with the number of current players. Using the ratio 8/21 (8 votes on day 1, 21 original players), right now that comes out to 6 votes, rounded down.
On the other hand, a faster game possibly benefits the werewolves. Voting will be more random, which tends to favor them.
I agree with the 4-day limit. I’m not so sure about reducing the number of votes needed at this point. We don’t know how many werewolves there are, but the fewer votes needed to start the “final countdown”, the more likely it is that the werewolves can work together to “fix” the vote. I think we should leave it at 8 until we get down to 14 players, then knock it down once a day or so, keeping the number at 50%.
I can agree to a 4-day day.
Final countdown limit of anything over 4 votes is fine by me.
This is quite true. I guess I’m not sure where to call bullshit. jsgoddess expressed a similar sentiment in her vote for Winston Smith. Everyone could have a reason to be lying and spinning a persona. Menocchio is a good example of someone who didn’t do it well enough. But then, moonstarsun gets lynched and she really didn’t do much of anything to provoke it. I guess I really WANT there to be a werewolf-finding mathematical formula, because that would take the guesswork and trumped up nature of the lynching out of it. Or I could embrace the guesswork and just point fingers wherever the mood takes me. That might be more fun. Pass the raisins.
I’m trying to be rational about it and not personal, because my feeling is that rational criteria should work better. Right? But you’re right in saying that it probably won’t, because who knows why the lurkers are lurking? It irritates me that they are not really playing the game, though. There should be some in-game penalty for that, because if everyone chose to play that way, guess what? There would be no game. There would be no basis for voting.
You’re voting by what people are saying, which has proven to be unreliable (townies lynched 1 werewolf and 1 townie, so we’re 1/2). I want to vote on what people are not saying, which is probably equally unreliable. Somehow that qualifies me for lynching. I don’t get it. However, no one I’ve voted for has actually been lynched, so I don’t know if my criteria is valid or not. Neither do you.
It seems to me that what you’re saying is, you’re going to penalize people who bother to talk, to play the game by chatting it up with the other players and offering their thoughts, by finding bullshit reasons to vote for people; OTOH, you will reward people who hide in the shadows because, well, they haven’t said anything suspicious. Of course they haven’t! They haven’t said anything at all, and you’re condoning that, which IMO violates the spirit of the game. I believe I’m acting in the best interests of the town. You’re chosing to protect lurkers. I have to wonder why. Are there wolves hiding in the shadows, maybe your packmates, who you’re desperately covering for with your strategy?
This sounds good.
I think voting is random regardless, and a faster day benefits people IRL, who didn’t realize this game could be a 4-5 month commitment with posting and checking the board daily the whole time.
A 4-day round means tomorrow is the final day, if I have my maths right (which would probably be a first).
Could we get a vote count, then? And are we sticking with the 8 votes to a countdown, or lowering to 6?
Stick with 8 for now. I’ll have a think at the end of this round.
Rubystreak - 2 Votes (Miller, sturmhauke)
Winston Smith - 2 Votes (jsgoddess, MadTheSwine)
sturmhauke - 1 Vote (One and Only Wanderers)
Richard Parker and I did vote, but withdrew our votes before the day was over. I think there is a distinction there.
As for throwing a vote toward someone who was in no danger, I don’t really see the point. Why should I cast a vote that I know would have no bearing? Just so that I could say “Look at me, I voted”?
How about extending “today” through the weekend, but then cutting back future “days” to 4 calendar days? Just so that people who have been busy (like myself) will have enough time to go over things properly, given that we all expected to have until midweek to make a decision.
That does seem fair. Ok, until Sunday, then, as a compromise.