Representative Democracy [Concluded]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

Spreading scum makes it easier for them to influence multiple district votes, no?

---

I'm just imagining say five districts, one of which is nothing but scum and the rest of which are entirely controlled by townies. And what kind of position that would put the scum in. The most effective way to reduce mafia power may not be to dilute it, but rather to concentrate it into relative powerlessness. Think gerrymandering.




a) You and DP101 have both suggested 5. Why 5? Iirc Districts only need a minimum of 3 players and we start with 21. Mathsarehard but that gives us 7 if we split to maximum?

b) Why does the number 5 make the strategy of separating those you find scummy from those you find Towny not a sound approach?[/QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

I think you may be overlooking the option where Town isn't coherent and mafia just sit back and then later let/push them take the fall for early confusion. Not sore if that's deliberate or just blinkers at this point.

Solution either way: Town just be awesome and find Scum!

---

I like you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Remember that, beyond electing the voters, Joe Blows can only make public arguments. Because there is a layer of disconnect between vote and argument here, and because the votes are so few, relying on a calculus oriented towards more typical games won't fit here.

The big question will be, who will receive cases, and why?* I may well be wrong, but I suspect a large random curve.

*In general sense, not in connection to scum motivations

---

What if ground rules become everybody in a District votes, and the District representative puts fourth the vote that reflects majority?

Am I wrong to assume we're effectively in a Democracy here?

Representative democracy, meaning that just like in the real world, our representative is free to tell their constituents to take a hike and vote according to the wishes of the lobbyists mafia or personal whims or whatever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

a) You and DP101 have both suggested 5. Why 5? Iirc Districts only need a minimum of 3 players and we start with 21. Mathsarehard but that gives us 7 if we split to maximum?

b) Why does the number 5 make the strategy of separating those you find scummy from those you find Towny not a sound approach?

---

We are split to maximum.

First, only the Chancellor can do it so the question is moot. But if I were Chancellor, separating - let's say I peeked them scum - scum should not have a clear effect on the lynch in any particular way. The only possible scenario is if I knew how someone would vote if elected and created ground for representatives mostly interested in lynching some scum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renata

On what schedule do we choose our reps? Every day?

---

I think with every redistricting, so not exactly every day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

if there's more than 1 mafia in the district reps, then a scum is almost never going to get lynched. Pretty high price to pay for slightly better late-game analysis.

---

Not really. It looks awful for representatives, and whether or not they are scum you can fix the situation by forcing byelections.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renata

I like you.

---

Now. You like me now .

Wait for the real crazy to come out.

Also, <3 but pocket attempt denied :p

Who else do you like right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

What if ground rules become everybody in a District votes, and the District representative puts fourth the vote that reflects majority?

Am I wrong to assume we're effectively in a Democracy here?

---

If you can get people to agree to it on informal grounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renata

I'm just imagining say five districts, one of which is nothing but scum and the rest of which are entirely controlled by townies. And what kind of position that would put the scum in. The most effective way to reduce mafia power may not be to dilute it, but rather to concentrate it into relative powerlessness. Think gerrymandering.

---

Deeply unlikely to happen, and we won't know about it until after the fact. Russian roulette is a sounder approach than this. And if it did happen by chance, then in terms of strategy what would it tell us? The only case is if then they keep in the same district with each other and none of them is NKed, but even then since the grounds for NK will be shifted in this game it's a complete pie-sky thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

What if ground rules become everybody in a District votes, and the District representative puts fourth the vote that reflects majority?

Am I wrong to assume we're effectively in a Democracy here?

---

Yes. The problem comes when someone has a strong feel on someone and that is opposite the rest of the area. They may vote with their feel no matter that they said theyd go with majority

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

Now. You like me now .

Wait for the real crazy to come out.

Also, <3 but pocket attempt denied :p

Who else do you like right now?

---

Dp, maybe? I don't like the defeatism, but so far he's about what I would have expected from last game.

Morning

Gimme power

Bye

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

If you can get people to agree to it on informal grounds.



Deeply unlikely to happen, and we won't know about it until after the fact. Russian roulette is a sounder approach than this. And if it did happen by chance, then in terms of strategy what would it tell us? The only case is if then they keep in the same district with each other and none of them is NKed, but even then since the grounds for NK will be shifted in this game it's a complete pie-sky thought.

---

I'm talking about approaches for the chancellor, not the extremes of outcome. There's two basic approaches: try to dilute scum influence in any given district by splitting the scummy people up, or doing exactly the opposite and trying to keep them together to minimize the districts they can influence. Or put another way, by keeping all the towniest people together such that a certain district might almost turn into a masonry and lead the rest. I don't know which is better, but Cass' comment got my mind spinning.

I'm having trouble understanding your wording at times; I'm not sure what's going on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

Morning

Gimme power

Bye

---

Vote yourself, silly.

Game.seems pretty simple

I choose.someone and everyone votes for them to die

I'll kill the scum eventually

Renata, never forget the night kill. It will be our best hope in weeding out scum. Don't pin hopes on electing "the right" people at this point.

What could be a killing blow against Town: 10 people left, scum Chancellor elected, "You want gerrymandering? You got it!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

Morning

Gimme power

Bye

---

You're next in line. Get rid of Zack first. Then we lynch GH and elect you Chancellor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

1. If you can get people to agree to it on informal grounds.



2. Deeply unlikely to happen, and we won't know about it until after the fact. Russian roulette is a sounder approach than this. And if it did happen by chance, then in terms of strategy what would it tell us? The only case is if then they keep in the same district with each other and none of them is NKed, but even then since the grounds for NK will be shifted in this game it's a complete pie-sky thought.

---

1. Question: Does it make most sense in favour of Town?
I think it does. Every player accountable for a vote, and either voting with or away from a consensus that has either a positive or negative outcome.

So scum hunting is still the same.

The main risk here as I see it is Scum have the potential/responsibility for a new/higher level of divide and conquer. Town have to step up and try and establish rules for the greater good.

2. In terms of strategy, what are you thinking will work best and why?

I don't think Russian Roulette is a fair comparison? We all play mafia, we all have scum hunting skills, scum hunting doesn't just fall down to luck/chance.

Off the cuff, Renata has voiced what I'm thinking and I can't tell if you're fear-mongering or just seeing things from a different side with a stronger point of view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Renata, never forget the night kill. It will be our best hope in weeding out scum.

---

You keep talking about the night kill. I don't know what you're getting at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass

1. Question: Does it make most sense in favour of Town?
I think it does. Every player accountable for a vote, and either voting with or away from a consensus that has either a positive or negative outcome.

---

As I said, good luck arranging it.

Quote:

---

2. In terms of strategy, what are you thinking will work best and why?

---

Nothing yet. That's for post-mortem. I'll do whatever makes sense in the moment or for perceived developing teams.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renata

You keep talking about the night kill. I don't know what you're getting at.

---

No! Only now...

Vote: Visor
Vote: Visor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dicetosser1

Yes. The problem comes when someone has a strong feel on someone and that is opposite the rest of the area. They may vote with their feel no matter that they said theyd go with majority

---

Aaandd in that case, representatives breaking the trust of their electors should be scrutinised heavily, and either way would probably provide valuable information for/through the next day, as long as as it isn't done by every representative in every phase.

?

Orrrr, is it smarter scum hunting strategy to elect people as representatives and force them to vote/justify their cases of their own volition, without direct input from their districts?

I don't care if I'm a chancellor, I do care about being a representative.

I'm a double voter if I get representative status, so if the two others don't vote the same or vote abstain or whatever

I get to choose the lynch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

As I said, good luck arranging it.



Nothing yet. That's for post-mortem. I'll do whatever makes sense in the moment or for perceived developing teams.



No! Only now...

---

Lol the bold ...

It doesn't give me your opinion or input though, which is kind of what I was after :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

I don't care if I'm a chancellor, I do care about being a representative.

I'm a double voter if I get representative status, so if the two others don't vote the same or vote abstain or whatever

I get to choose the lynch

---

@Winston Hughes @BSmith @Csargo @Riedquat @El Barto @Monstrbro

gimme power please

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass

It doesn't give me your opinion or input though, which is kind of what I was after :P

---

I don't think much of it, but I won't oppose the campaign to put it in place (or its enforcement).

Quote:

---

Orrrr, is it smarter scum hunting strategy to elect people as representatives and force them to vote/justify their cases of their own volition, without direct input from their districts?

---

Keep in mind that we will elect new representatives whenever redistricting occurs. This will depend on where the lynches and kills fall, and the inclinations of the Chancellor. It might be more useful to spend time influencing others' representatives than just your own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

I don't care if I'm a chancellor, I do care about being a representative.

I'm a double voter if I get representative status, so if the two others don't vote the same or vote abstain or whatever

I get to choose the lynch

---

WHAT?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

I don't care if I'm a chancellor, I do care about being a representative.

I'm a double voter if I get representative status, so if the two others don't vote the same or vote abstain or whatever

I get to choose the lynch

---

Oooohhhh

Visor for Representative!

And Doc protect as long as he lynches wolves.

Why can't we share a District v.v

Visor is evil and lying, especially if he's not lying.

What is the meaning of this?

I'm trying to understand why you don't think much of it?

1. Need to see if I'm not seeing holes.

2. Think it's best if everyone put opinions and thoughts on the board.

This mechanics talk is great and all, but where are the reads

I think Cass is town and renata probably also town

I kinda like Dices first post just because

zack is.... okay? i guess

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass

I'm trying to understand why you don't think much of it?

---

If you favor it for the sake of "data", then I don't see that it will produce more than leaving townies to speak whatever to no effect, and representatives to engage directly with each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

This mechanics talk is great and all, but where are the reads

I think Cass is town and renata probably also town

I kinda like Dices first post just because

zack is.... okay? i guess

---

Why would you claim double vote?

Hey folks. Just checking in during some pre-Christmas cleaning. Given that I only know Dp here, I don't have much to offer at this point other than my initial reactions. The push to get Zack seemed to pick up a lot of steam very quickly. That could simply be his personality, we have some very good townies on my board as well, but it still strikes me as somewhat odd. I do find Cass' take on it to be more reassuring. Given the format of this game, the person in charge of setting districts has the capacity to either greatly hurt or greatly help town, and I'm more interested in someone who is going to take a strategic approach to the position rather than use it as a platform to test their own gut feelings on who is scum.

Vote: Dp101
Vote: Cass
Vote: Zack

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

I think we already agreed on this bit in that I think the best strategy early on is many groups, and small.
a) You and DP101 have both suggested 5. Why 5? Iirc Districts only need a minimum of 3 players and we start with 21. Mathsarehard but that gives us 7 if we split to maximum?

b) Why does the number 5 make the strategy of separating those you find scummy from those you find Towny not a sound approach?

---

I think the more groups we have total, the less likely we are to have Scum in control of a majority of them. Seven sounds like a safer play for town.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Keep in mind that we will elect new representatives whenever redistricting occurs. This will depend on where the lynches and kills fall, and the inclinations of the Chancellor. It might be more useful to spend time influencing others' representatives than just your own.

---

Can you explain how the bold fits with the rest?

If we get redistributed we re-elect the person we want to either represent our, or justify their own, vote?

I'm getting the impression you're leaning towards playing independently with the setup as an additional piece if the puzzle?

Sounds like the easiest option to me and I can't hate it til I've had more time to think, but what ways can you see to make this setup work for Town?

FWIW, I see 4, max 5 wolves in this setup.

Either is about as equally likely, just depends how wolfsided atpg thinks the lynch mechanics and PRs are

Why is Zack ok?

Player-specific thoughts on the early push towards him as Chancellor etc?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

Why is Zack ok?

Player-specific thoughts on the early push towards him as Chancellor etc?

---

i read his posts when i was half asleep

and they were okay, didn't really lean me one way or the other

maybe slightly good

in fact lets just make a yolo judgement call here

sooh is a wolf

zack is a villager
renata is a villager
monty is... probably a wolf (yolo)
cass is a villager
choxorn is a villager
dice is a villager
dp is (yolo) a villager
gh is a villager
jabbz could be a wolf but idk yet

and thats my reads rn

and if you ask why #feels

visor and cass should be reps, very likely villagers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

No! Only now...

---

The only good thing about my current confusion, maybe, is that confusing the heck out of me was not part of your scum strategy from last game. You were "wonderfully" straight-forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

if there's more than 1 mafia in the district reps, then a scum is almost never going to get lynched. Pretty high price to pay for slightly better late-game analysis.

---

So you're also for the 'put all the possi/consensus-scummies' in one District?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Mechanic suggestion for future: Representatives can communicate privately with the Chancellor.

---

Why privately?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

So you're also for the 'put all the possi/consensus-scummies' in one District?



Why privately?

---

there I was specifically explaining why dp's "let the mafia decide who to lynch" strategy was bad

though I do tend to favor that line of thought, yes. not convinced either way yet, depends on game state like i said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

I don't care if I'm a chancellor, I do care about being a representative.

I'm a double voter if I get representative status, so if the two others don't vote the same or vote abstain or whatever

I get to choose the lynch

---

Who'd you bribe to get that role?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

if there's more than 1 mafia in the district reps, then a scum is almost never going to get lynched. Pretty high price to pay for slightly better late-game analysis.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Mechanic suggestion for future: Representatives can communicate privately with the Chancellor.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sooh

3 districts, 1 mafia voter, 2 townie voters
3 districts, 1 town voter, 2 mafia voters
3 districts, 3 town voters
3 districts, 3 mafia voters

I don't know that I'd be able to distinguish one from the other here based on votes, but perhaps I'm missing something. Seems to me like scum would be able to easily slip under the radar in either of these configurations. What am I not seeing?

Not sure a bigger selection would be better either, I just don't really understand the sort of techniques that would be applicable to scum here.

---

Soohbear, got brain's on what will work best for Town here?

My head hurts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renata

The only good thing about my current confusion, maybe, is that confusing the heck out of me was not part of your scum strategy from last game. You were "wonderfully" straight-forward.

---

I don't think straightforward is a word I would have ever used to descibe his play in that game lol

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Forum help? Why do I keep getting extra quotes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass

Can you explain how the bold fits with the rest?

---

Don't put too much stock on the relationship within-district, I'm saying. One prediction I am willing to make is that scum don't want static groupings, whether or not they can push for groupings that highlight their targets. Static groupings, perhaps in a way that your thoughts foreshadow, are more difficult for scums to move in and pocket in than the larger mass of players.

Quote:

---

If we get redistributed we re-elect the person we want to either represent our, or justify their own, vote?

---

I don't think a gameplan is helpful right now, but by all means compile a list of possibilities that we can refer to later.

Quote:

---

I'm getting the impression you're leaning towards playing independently with the setup as an additional piece if the puzzle?

---

Yeah


EVIL
EVIL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Forum help? Why do I keep getting extra quotes?

---

think you have to go advanced to clear multi-quotes

Ok, someone else be chancellor since it is obvious that my plan is bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renata

Who'd you bribe to get that role?

---

I gave Pizza a double stuffed crust

Also this mechanics talk, whilst great

is distracting from actual gameplay

No point worrying about reordering districts or chancellor or whatever

we have to work with what we have for this lynch right?

Worry about it in the next day phase, right now we need information on players in this game before we even decide about restructuring

so lets start doing that first

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

So you're also for the 'put all the possi/consensus-scummies' in one District?



Why privately?

---

Well, obviously they can do so publicly, but privately fits better with the theme and gives more personal weight to the positions than merely vote channels. Allows them to plan for future districting, to exchange favors.

You would probably need to permit more representatives, that I give you. A game with many players like in the old days, 30, 40, 50 - that would be a real run. Proper elite networking, though not necessarily PR networking.

My EVIL EVIL remark was directed at Visor, but his quote disappeared from my post.

VISOR IS EVIL

Vote: Visor

Elect and lynch, or reject and lynch. Either way he must be purged.

I'm a fan of the mindless push monty, but you might want to give a reason for it at some stage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

I don't think straightforward is a word I would have ever used to descibe his play in that game lol

---

Go on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

I gave Pizza a double stuffed crust

Also this mechanics talk, whilst great

is distracting from actual gameplay

No point worrying about reordering districts or chancellor or whatever

we have to work with what we have for this lynch right?

Worry about it in the next day phase, right now we need information on players in this game before we even decide about restructuring

so lets start doing that first

---

also this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

I'm a fan of the mindless push monty, but you might want to give a reason for it at some stage

---

You claim and run. You can't run.

And I would have followed you, my brother, my partner, my don.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Go on.

---

no it's irrelevant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jabbz

Hey folks. Just checking in during some pre-Christmas cleaning. Given that I only know Dp here, I don't have much to offer at this point other than my initial reactions. The push to get Zack seemed to pick up a lot of steam very quickly. That could simply be his personality, we have some very good townies on my board as well, but it still strikes me as somewhat odd. I do find Cass' take on it to be more reassuring. Given the format of this game, the person in charge of setting districts has the capacity to either greatly hurt or greatly help town, and I'm more interested in someone who is going to take a strategic approach to the position rather than use it as a platform to test their own gut feelings on who is scum.

[votes removed]





I think the more groups we have total, the less likely we are to have Scum in control of a majority of them. Seven sounds like a safer play for town.

---

Hi Jabbz! vote: Jabbz

For an innocuous "here's the state of the game, yup" intro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

no it's irrelevant

---

Write me a letter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

You claim and run. You can't run.

And I would have followed you, my brother, my partner, my don.

---

???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

I gave Pizza a double stuffed crust

Also this mechanics talk, whilst great

is distracting from actual gameplay

No point worrying about reordering districts or chancellor or whatever

we have to work with what we have for this lynch right?

Worry about it in the next day phase, right now we need information on players in this game before we even decide about restructuring

so lets start doing that first

---

:state:

Yes, sir, mr townie sir.

Emoticon fail. :stare:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

???

---

He claims double vote, and leaves it hanging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renata

Hi Jabbz! vote: Jabbz

For an innocuous "here's the state of the game, yup" intro.

---

i like this because its what i thought about the post

i want to give him some time though, see where he goes from there yet

could just be a style clash

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

He claims double vote, and leaves it hanging.

---

What do you want me to say about it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

He claims double vote, and leaves it hanging.

---

he claimed a double vote if he is elected representative then pushed people to vote him representative

how in the fuck is that "claim and run" ?

why would that even be a wolfy thing to do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Visor

What do you want me to say about it?

---

Everything you can. Starting with why you would claim it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Everything you can. Starting with why you would claim it.

---

so I can get voted into a position to use my power?

he literally claimed why simultaneous with the claim

Hardclaim: Liar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

he literally claimed why simultaneous with the claim

---

That's exactly why it's evil and makes no sense ffs

Vote: Sooh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

That's exactly why it's evil and makes no sense ffs

---

https://i.imgur.com/0mw1I8e.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dp101

I never suggested 5, and the idea to split scum up later was including the idea that the districts would be made larger, so each individual vote would matter less, so the small amount of votes controlled by the mafia will matter far less than town.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dp101

Well, I haven't really planned one out because I was not planning on running, but basically what I was thinking was early on to split people into as many districts as possible, to make as many votes visible as possible. Then, once we have something resembling information/when I need to split them, I would make a small number (probably 5) of large districts, spreading the people I find scummy around so they can't control a district, and thus hopefully only let town vote. Probably terrible, but we are all experimenting here.

---

You did too say 5? See bold :p

I think I can see what you're saying with italics.

Does this arrangement help us catch out scum?

I think it's ok if we run Democratic Districts and force everyone to vote.

I think it's too easy for split scum to hide if District Representatives do their own thing and members don't have to be accountable for their vote.

Unless we make Representatives those we think are scummy, which is a baaaaaad idea.

What about a smaller number of large Democratic Districts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

https://i.imgur.com/0mw1I8e.gif

---

Why would you have that prepared

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cass_

You did too say 5? See bold :p

I think I can see what you're saying with italics.

Does this arrangement help us catch out scum?

I think it's ok if we run Democratic Districts and force everyone to vote.

I think it's too easy for split scum to hide if District Representatives do their own thing and members don't have to be accountable for their vote.

Unless we make Representatives those we think are scummy, which is a baaaaaad idea.

What about a smaller number of large Democratic Districts?

---

no because that's dumb and not fun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Why would you have that prepared

---

?

i used google to find it

Ok, sorry. I forgot that I named a number, it was just for the purpose of providing an example and was not something I would stick to.

Cass, we can only have 3 or 5 districts in this game. 7 is unavailable as there is no Chancellor to redistrict yet, and tomorrow there will be 19 players. Just to clarify that.

Now, holding people accountable for votes needs to happen (in your view I assume) regardless of how representatives act, so the question is then: is it practical to enact or enforce, and if so will it actually keep voters accountable more than its absence?

why the sooh vote visor

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

?

i used google to find it

---

In one minute? This is some 4chan nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zack

why the sooh vote visor

---

just gut feeling about her early posts really

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

In one minute? This is some 4chan nonsense.

---

how long does it take you to type "nathan fillion gif"?