Montmorency 00:16 12-18-2016
Originally Posted by Renata:
Don't you think that us ordinary non-reps will have to justify our votes as well? (We don't get to just not have one -- see rules.) I'd say that any rep who didn't demand some kind of accountability from their home-district voters isn't doing their job.
Don't push this too far, however. Mafia could use similar reasoning to support town representatives and lynch them and around them on the basis of scapecatting. Most power with scum chancellor to shuffle the board in a way that draws attention to targets.
I don't think I understand what you mean.
dicetosser1 00:18 12-18-2016
vote hankerchief
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
Originally Posted by Renata:
Don't you think that us ordinary non-reps will have to justify our votes as well? (We don't get to just not have one -- see rules.) I'd say that any rep who didn't demand some kind of accountability from their home-district voters isn't doing their job.
Both good points, I will think about these and maybe come back.
Originally Posted by Dp101:
I wouldn't be proposing it as a potential plan if I didn't. The more mafia that get elected to vote in the actual lunch, the more mafia that have to justify their votes, and the more that we can catch.
helping the mafia in the hopes of better late-game analysis is a really preposterous suggestion, I thought you were trolling
Montmorency 00:26 12-18-2016
Originally Posted by :
I don't think I understand what you mean.
It's cool if its me doing it, but we should be looking out for perpetual "backbenchers" accusing representatives and others along the stratagem of creating perceived mistakes or pitfalls for representatives and then condemning them on those grounds.
We can't put the snake around our wrists!
Originally Posted by Renata:
Chancellor fun aside, my eye is really on the district reps and what they do with the votes from the rest of us. So Dp, I'm voting for you for rep currently. What are your ideas there?
Dice seems weird, Cass feels solvey, Zack is his normal self, and you/Monty kinda feel similar, neither taking very bold positions on any of the issues. I think on balance I would vote for Dice, but I don't know his style + it is early in the day so will probably change.
Originally Posted by Dp101:
In the early game, confining the scummiest people to one district may reduce their early voting power, but early on the town is very misinformed and probably won't catch mafia anyway. Better to allow the mafia to control the lynch a bit in order to hold the accountable for it.
Originally Posted by Dp101:
The fact that they can influence the vote means that we will be able to see what more people are voting for, we can't put them all into one district at this point because we still need to figure out who the mafia are, which is the point of the small-district stage.
I think we already agreed on this bit in that I think the best strategy early on is many groups, and small.
Although I think it's defeatist to say we probably won't catch Scum anyway - I'd rather an active, coherent Town successfully control the lynch and catch Scum, even on D1, and have Scum get held accountable that way :p
I'm trying to understand when/why you would split into a smaller number of groups and why you would spread your scum-reads amongst those like you suggested in your initial plan?
Spreading scum makes it easier for them to influence multiple district votes, no?
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
Because "many" means 5, this isn't a sound approach. What will become the driver is as-yet unknown, but in principle your suggestion is not how it can or should work.
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?
dicetosser1 00:30 12-18-2016
Originally Posted by Dp101:
Dice seems weird, Cass feels solvey, Zack is his normal self, and you/Monty kinda feel similar, neither taking very bold positions on any of the issues. I think on balance I would vote for Dice, but I don't know his style + it is early in the day so will probably change.
how am I weird?
pretty sure cass is town
Originally Posted by Montmorency:
It's cool if its me doing it, but we should be looking out for perpetual "backbenchers" accusing representatives and others along the stratagem of creating perceived mistakes or pitfalls for representatives and then condemning them on those grounds.
We can't put the snake around our wrists!
On what schedule do we choose our reps? Every day?
Originally Posted by Zack:
helping the mafia in the hopes of better late-game analysis is a really preposterous suggestion, I thought you were trolling
My point was that town is very wrong early on, so having a higher-than-normal chance of mafia votes mattering will not drop the chances of mafia getting lynched by any significant margin.
Originally Posted by Dp101:
Dice seems weird, Cass feels solvey, Zack is his normal self, and you/Monty kinda feel similar, neither taking very bold positions on any of the issues. I think on balance I would vote for Dice, but I don't know his style + it is early in the day so will probably change.
That wasn't actually my question. I'm saying, if you are the representative for our district, what do you plan to do with all our votes/ideas? Vote with the plurality always, follow your own star, try to make a choice in light of other district votes ...?
Originally Posted by dicetosser1:
how am I weird?
Just something about your tone, as mentioned this is probably just me not being familiar with you so I will most likely abandon it later.
Originally Posted by Dp101:
Mafia always will try to some extent, in case town randomly finds mafia and they need to save them. The more lynch votes we have, the more data points we have to look at later as to who exactly tried to swing the lynch.
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!
Originally Posted by Zack:
what pushes lol
Pushes for you as Chancellor etc.
*keeps popcorn warm*
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.
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.
Although I think it's defeatist to say we probably won't catch Scum anyway - I'd rather an active, coherent Town successfully control the lynch and catch Scum, even on D1, and have Scum get held accountable that way :p
I'm trying to understand when/why you would split into a smaller number of groups and why you would spread your scum-reads amongst those like you suggested in your initial plan?
Spreading scum makes it easier for them to influence multiple district votes, no?
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 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.
Originally Posted by Cass_:
Pushes for you as Chancellor etc.
*keeps popcorn warm*
I appreciate the votes. Not sure what you think is supposed to be exciting about my reaction.
Originally Posted by Renata:
That wasn't actually my question. I'm saying, if you are the representative for our district, what do you plan to do with all our votes/ideas? Vote with the plurality always, follow your own star, try to make a choice in light of other district votes ...?
Probably a mix of all of the above. It will depend on how much I trust my district at the time.
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]
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.
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.
Montmorency 00:45 12-18-2016
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.
Originally Posted by Renata:
On what schedule do we choose our reps? Every day?
I think with every redistricting, so not exactly every day.
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.
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?
Montmorency 00:49 12-18-2016
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.
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.
dicetosser1 00:51 12-18-2016
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
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
Single Sign On provided by
vBSSO