|
Post by commonyoshi on Jul 18, 2009 2:46:02 GMT -6
So... is it the night phase? >_>
|
|
Fobby
Green Belt
[M:7000]
break it down[ss:District Court No. 76]
Posts: 685
Likes: 5
|
Post by Fobby on Jul 18, 2009 10:46:05 GMT -6
No, I don't think so.The day ends on Monday, apparently. So we still have time to decide what we want to do as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by Erniewan on Jul 18, 2009 11:15:15 GMT -6
How about the Lottery numbers, you think I could use that to assign us a random lynchee?
|
|
|
Post by commonyoshi on Jul 18, 2009 11:42:39 GMT -6
Who watches the Watchmen?
|
|
|
Post by Erniewan on Jul 18, 2009 11:52:58 GMT -6
Or how about I get the random number, and you make a random list. We'll have to post them somewhere to make sure that neither of us is lying.
Edit: And just so you know, I can't fix the lottery. I click the button and it re-randomizes them.
|
|
|
Post by commonyoshi on Jul 18, 2009 15:25:46 GMT -6
I am too lazy to do such a thing. Someone else do it. ^_^
|
|
|
Post by Defjamffny18 on Jul 18, 2009 15:54:41 GMT -6
are we allowed to edit posts?
|
|
|
Post by jamis on Jul 18, 2009 18:42:42 GMT -6
I think if we are randomly killing someone, it should be someone inactive. Here's a post count not counting double posts because I'm not sure if we can edit posts or not. Erniewan--12 commonyoshi--8 Meow--8 Jamis--6 fobby-5 nintendo_1111—3 Defjamffny16—3 Captain Planet--3 Worthy Protoplasm—2 Mirace Fassad –2 Hellfire—1 DrShlub—1 Flint--1 darthpokey--0
Darthpokey seems like a good choice since he hasn't posted, but he may have also just forgotten about the game. I'll send him a PM. Hellfire's also being unnaturally quiet. Perhaps we could pick him.
|
|
|
Post by Erniewan on Jul 18, 2009 18:48:12 GMT -6
I don't think anyone should be able to suggest the vote, for fear that it might be influenced. But your plan to lynch an inactive seems reasonable, perhaps we should do our random selection from a pool of the least active.
|
|
|
Post by jamis on Jul 18, 2009 18:54:59 GMT -6
Hm, that seems fair. I'd be willing to support that. Perhaps everyone on the list who posted 2 or less times.
|
|
|
Post by Worthy Protoplasm on Jul 18, 2009 18:56:48 GMT -6
Excuse me for not posting every day. >.>
Anyway, I like the idea of selecting from the least active.
|
|
|
Post by Darthpokey on Jul 18, 2009 20:17:18 GMT -6
I'm still here. I've been reading up on everything but I just haven't had much to say at the moment. So yeah this is just to let you guys know I'm not dead or anything like that.
|
|
|
Post by DrShlub on Jul 19, 2009 9:43:14 GMT -6
So... tommorow we're not going to have any leads except one person being dead and we won't have a detectve or any other informative roles to ask which means there will be an unfortunate lack of information, anyone have any ideas of how to root out the existance of a conspiracy?
|
|
|
Post by Hellfire on Jul 19, 2009 10:52:57 GMT -6
Ok, this game is really weird and that's why its really confusing to post here. I don't know much about it and I actually do forget to check up on this thread because its not under Mafia Games. But I did read this yesterday though and didn't say anything.
But how is random lynching in this situation sensible? We are sending our votes in to LMM. If I'm not mistaken, we do not vote in here...so we can't use who voted for whom to figure out if there is a conspiracy. Now yes, we'll be down one person tomorrow...but it could help us figure out if there is a conspiracy or not based on who died and their posts. Lynching inactives seems pointless since they have not posted! What are you going to base suspicions on whether there is a conspiracy or not? That one post they made? Probably won't help us much. Frankly, lynching the more active people would reveal more...but that does come at the cost of losing someone that could keep this game moving. I personally think we should not decide on a person to lynch for today and see what happens...tomorrow we could do that. We don't properly know the game yet, so we don't know the consequences. I think one day without the lynch won't hurt us. Remember, the conspirers don't have a night kill..just the lynch. We're going to be only one person down either way. I think we should let us make our own decisions today, and then if nothing important gets revealed, on Day 2 we can decide and random person to lynch.
Also, for a lynch, does there have to be a majority, or just the person with the most votes gets lynched?
|
|
|
Post by commonyoshi on Jul 19, 2009 10:57:05 GMT -6
Well, if we announce in group consensus WHO we want to kill and it doesn't happen then that's a little tricky. Still doesn't mean there's a conspiracy, but it doesn't hurt its chances.
|
|
|
Post by Hellfire on Jul 19, 2009 11:26:39 GMT -6
And somehow you believe that if we make a group consensus on who we kill, the conspirators will lynch someone else? I know if I was one, I would just follow what the town says...I mean wouldn't that be the smart, or rather the only not dumb thing to do?
|
|
|
Post by Erniewan on Jul 19, 2009 13:57:00 GMT -6
And somehow you believe that if we make a group consensus on who we kill, the conspirators will lynch someone else? I know if I was one, I would just follow what the town says...I mean wouldn't that be the smart, or rather the only not dumb thing to do? Hellfire, that is why we are doing it randomly. It's possible that we might get rid of a conspirator. If we keep at it, eventually we'll force them to choose someone else or they'll get kill off themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Hellfire on Jul 19, 2009 14:19:50 GMT -6
Ok, well I was thinking that the conspirators might have all voted for one person to lynch, and if we didn't choose someone and that someone was lynched, we'd have figured out there's a conspiracy. But I don't think they have a board that they can talk in outside this forum, so I don't mind lynching as much anymore. That's also why I asked if a majority was required. Anyone know if its the majority or if the person with the most votes that's lynched?
|
|
|
Post by jamis on Jul 19, 2009 16:01:07 GMT -6
I think it's the most votes. And even if the conspiracy doesn't have a board, they can communicate since everyone can PM whoever.
|
|
|
Post by flint on Jul 19, 2009 17:00:36 GMT -6
sorry guys limited Computer time
|
|
|
Post by DrShlub on Jul 20, 2009 11:00:26 GMT -6
Wait, if there is conspiracy, then only the conspirators votes count, right? So that means it's impossible to lynch a conspirator, assuming there is one, but we have to have a lynch which means that we have to have a random lynch...
|
|
Captain Planet
Shodan {1st degree}
[M:10200]
He's a hero![ss:District Court No. 76]
Posts: 2,620
Likes: 3
Favorite Mafia Role: flying octopus
|
Post by Captain Planet on Jul 20, 2009 11:09:00 GMT -6
I believe what is believed to happen Shlub, is that if we all agree to stock pile our votes on somebody who is a conspirator then the conspiracists may decide to kill that person. To push the belief that the regulars control the votes and not the conspiracy.
|
|
Fobby
Green Belt
[M:7000]
break it down[ss:District Court No. 76]
Posts: 685
Likes: 5
|
Post by Fobby on Jul 20, 2009 11:11:20 GMT -6
And basically, each conspirator we kill (or rather, force them to kill) gives them less and less control of the game.
Once again, provided there is a conspiracy.
|
|
|
Post by Erniewan on Jul 20, 2009 12:07:05 GMT -6
Well, time's almost up. Someone come up with a random list of inactives and post it somewhere. I'll come up with a random number out of total inactives and post it somewhere else.
|
|
Captain Planet
Shodan {1st degree}
[M:10200]
He's a hero![ss:District Court No. 76]
Posts: 2,620
Likes: 3
Favorite Mafia Role: flying octopus
|
Post by Captain Planet on Jul 20, 2009 14:53:53 GMT -6
Is inactivity really the way to lynch? Considering I've had discussions off and on the site. I'm sure others have as well.
|
|
|
Post by jamis on Jul 20, 2009 16:07:29 GMT -6
I think inactivity is probably the best chance we've got to not mess up with a random lynch. Like in mafia, conspirators would want to take out the most active and talkative people. People who are active, are helping, and people who aren't, aren't. Of course, if someone is being active privately, feel free to vouch for them, but I'm guessing the same people who are posting a lot in this topic, are the same people who are active privately. Anyway, I'm doing a post count right now. Edit: Erniewan--15 commonyoshi--9 Jamis--9 Meow--8 fobby-6 Captain Planet--5 Hellfire—4 nintendo_1111—3 Defjamffny16—3 Worthy Protoplasm—3 DrShlub—3 Mirace Fassad –2 Flint--2 darthpokey--1
People who have posted three or less times are nintendo_1111, Defjamffny, Worthy Protoplasm, Drshlub, Miracle Fassad, Flint, and darthpokey. Although, Flint said he's had limited computer time, and Hellfire has just recently became active, so I wasn't sure if they should be included/excluded on the list of inactives.
|
|
|
Post by Erniewan on Jul 20, 2009 17:56:36 GMT -6
I agree, and I think activity correlates to determination in winning, i.e. desire to find out the truth. Ultimately, it's going to come down who knows the truth if we are to win.
Anyways, Jamis, go ahead and make a list of those 7 randomly ordered. Post it someplace where no one will see it and that shows whether it has been edited. I'll go ahead and run a random number generator from 1-7 and we'll match them.
|
|
|
Post by jamis on Jul 20, 2009 18:55:36 GMT -6
k, done
Edit: actually, should I send a PM to everyone except you of the list, so that the possibility of you and me faking this is ruled out?
|
|
|
Post by Erniewan on Jul 20, 2009 19:35:27 GMT -6
Nah, they're just going to have to trust us; there are ways to fake it no matter what you do.
Ok, go ahead and post yours. My number has a time stamp, so it should be apparent I didn't make it up after the fact.
|
|
|
Post by jamis on Jul 20, 2009 19:46:14 GMT -6
|
|