Werewolf LIII: The Republic

[the phantom]

I'm slowly catching up on everyone's posts. I'll respond to them a few at a time.

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Boro

But sorry in a representative I don't want someone with their own mind, I want someone with my mind.

That is contrary to the entire point of having representatives. If we just vote for people who would vote the same way as us anyway, then all we're doing is having a mass vote, just like always.

And this goes for the next comment as well-

Originally Posted by Legate

I am also unwilling to give votes to certain people as Reps, for now, and among them is Mr. P. for the simple reason that he's too wilful.... We need strong Representatives, who have the intentions of the people in mind, and not just their own.

You say we need a "strong" rep, and yet you don't think that reps who will vote independently and with conviction are a good choice?

That is massive contradiction.

A strong rep will vote the way he feels. A weak rep will hide behind those that elected him.

Nogrod made an excellent point on this matter already-

Originally Posted by Nogrod

The one thing I'm afraid though is that a wolf elected as a representative may hide her/his motives behind the "popular support" - as someone already said that s/he would like to see the rep vote her/his way, not the rep's own way!

That is lovely reasoning Nogrod. A Werewolf could simply change his vote and not appear suspicious for it via following the whims of one of his constituents. "Well, you know, I was gonna vote for so-and-so, but since you did elect me and you're leaning this way I'll go ahead and vote that way."

Of course it would be done less obviously than that, but you get the point surely.

[the phantom]

I still don't understand the anti-filibuster votes. What's the point? We've been given a unique set up and we're basically voting to normalize it. Where's your spirit of adventure?

Do you actually fear it will be put to use with negative consequences here on Day 1?

Oh well.

Originally Posted by Lommy

I think they might just lay low and vote innocents as representatives because it's more probable that a village lynches an innocent anyway.

On Day 1 it is indeed likely that we will need no assitance in lynching an innocent, but surely the Werewolves must consider their positioning the rest of the game.

If people sit around and then suddenly try to turn themselves into reps after the first couple days then suspicion will go up. I would think it would be best to become a trusted rep as soon as possible. For at least a couple of the Wolves anyway. I'd think you would always want a bit of voting power, just in case.

Originally Posted by Lommy

But I don't like you bringing up this point at all. If you really did request so, it's rather unsporty of you to say it aloud. And if you didn't, that's a rather stupid trick. And at any rate, who says Fea would have fulfilled your request?

I agree that it would be unsporty to claim it. But notice that I merely floated it as a possibility.

Di had floated the idea that Fea would show favoritism (make me a Wolf) based on our relationship, and I think I was within bounds to respond and display that the favoritism could also work in the other direction.

Originally Posted by Lommy

He's too all over the place, he says some silly things and posts sometimes plain nonsense. Why?

It's called fun. You remember fun, don't you?

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Boro

So, phooey on the actual vote, they're overrated.

Perhaps, but not useless. Not to me, anyhow.

Originally Posted by Legate

Yes, especially the second paragraph boldened and twice underlined!! Because, among other things, otherwise, all this complicated Rep-system would be worth nothing. End to demagogues and hypocritical "Men of the People"! When you are voted for a Representative, show your worth! When we already have this Republic here, so let it be worth it! And those who fail your trust, into the waste with them - you can vote somebody else! This is the point of this whole system, or so I gathered - so let it be used to its fullest, so that we have something from it!

*chuckles*

Wait just a minute here. First you are on about how reps should consider everyone else's wishes and not be to self-willed, and then you go and agree with Nogrod about how Reps should stand up and not be wishy-washy?

Just what are you up to, Legate?

(still reading.... on to page 3...)

[the phantom]

Originally Posted by Lommy

I'd rather have lots of "weak" representatives than just a few people who wield immense power. It would strike me as more democratic and less dangerous.

Giving power to the few is only dangerous if they are on the wrong side.

Originally Posted by Aganzir

Yeah - after all, this is supposed to be a democracy, not theocracy.

Originally Posted by Shasta

Boro, you could say history doesn't matter, but look at how much Phantom has already said! History tends to repeat itself, after all.

In that case, I must be the Good Wizard, as that was my highest posting game.

Sweet. I can make a new Ranger tonight!

Originally Posted by Boro

and if the phantom's a wolf, well we're all screwed now anyway.

Precisely! It doesn't do any good to suspect me. You can know from reading your Werewolf history that whatever side I'm on benefits greatly from my help. And the vast majority of the time I am good, and thus the odds say that you should keep me around. Simple as that, really.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Wait just a minute here. First you are on about how reps should consider everyone else's wishes and not be to self-willed, and then you go and agree with Nogrod about how Reps should stand up and not be wishy-washy?

Well, I hope you gathered from what I have replied now in the post right above, that I never was for this populism. I never said anything about considering others' wishes! I spoke about the best intentions of the village - but that does not mean listening to a few villagers who whine "uncle Rep, vote that awful guy with the pink hair"! The Rep, once elected, should vote with the best intentions for the village in mind! Once again - and if you read all my posts, you will find it there from the beginning to the end - I say: I believe in reasonable players, who will do what is best, who know what is best, which is the point of this very game - and I am also doing that to see how different outcome such a voting (meaning now the lynch-voting later, which those Reps will make) will be from the usual WW-y voting of the "mindless masses". Clear?

EDIT: x-ed since my last post

[the phantom]

Well, I hope you gathered from what I have replied now in the post right above, that I never was for this populism. I never said anything about considering others' wishes! I spoke about the best intentions of the village

Well, if that is your justification, then I can only say that I am insulted that you would think that an innocent phantom would not have the best intentions of the village in mind. I have done some crazy things as an Ordo (suggested volunteers for lynching, lying about my role, etc) but these things were always done to help the village, even if they couldn't see what I was trying to do until after the fact. And usually I produced very favorable results for the village, which I think speaks for my intentions quite well.

[the phantom]

Wish Lalaith was here. She'd be able to testify to the fact that a manipulative-lying-through-his-teeth Phantom can be quite deadly to opposing Werewolves.

Question my means if you'd like, Legate, but never my intentions or motives.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by A Little Green

That's all very well - except that if we all hold back our suspicions all Day and only voice them a bit before deadline, that will not only make it really difficult to choose a representative for the people around at deadline, forcing them to hasty decisions since they get all the information only just before they have to decide, but also makes deciding close to impossible for those who are not able to be around late in the Day. Of course it's not that bad if only one Leggie does that, but if we all operated that way, it would end up quite nasty. [NAME EDITED AWAY ON BEHALF OF THE MOD'S WELL-BEING] said: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." That obviously makes you a sinner, which means you are a wolf. Easy, eh? (How come I have become so good at spotting wolves?)

I am aware of your point, but a) I know that not everybody will do that, and b) as I said it is an experiment I want to try when there is the chance, but mainly, and most of all, c) if you followed my thoughts, the reason for doing the experiment relies on the fact that I am NOT going to vote my representative, for most part, on who is he going to vote for. I am well aware of the riskiness, but heck, for me it's still worth it. I will vote a representative whom I believe as being capable of making a good decision on behalf of the village, that's the prime qualificiation.

Though point well taken. If we don't post any suspicions or such, we may not judge whether the Rep, who is otherwise a reliable person and whom we'd like to see as a leader, is not actually showing signs of Wolfishness. I am going to post some list on what I think about people, then, soon.

Originally Posted by the phantom

Well, if that is your justification, then I can only say that I am insulted that you would think that an innocent phantom would not have the best intentions of the village in mind. I have done some crazy things as an Ordo (suggested volunteers for lynching, lying about my role, etc) but these things were always done to help the village, even if they couldn't see what I was trying to do until after the fact. And usually I produced very favorable results for the village, which I think speaks for my intentions quite well.

Well, yes, sorry then for insulting you poor innocent phantom And apologies in forward to others about whom I am perhaps going to speak in similar terms in future. But you know, this is all just these high politics - one does not avoid saying things which may sound too gruff at times

[A Little Green]

Here at last. Hello. Sorry for taking so long, it's been a busy day. (And seemingly a busy Day as well.) So, first off, some thoughts on toDay's posts.

Originally Posted by the phantom

Must you use that word? I recall the words of a famous politician-

"Consensus is the absence of leadership".

Might be - but do we want leadership? I would much prefer consensus to leadership, not only because leadership can be so easily misused, but also because leadership makes a WW game really boring. After all, what's the fun in a game where you have a leader who does all the thinking for you?

Originally Posted by Noggins

I'd say we should not shy away from actually trying to suspect people on this first Day as well even if there are a host of interesting new things to speculate upon.

My thoughts exactly - I was going to mention this thing in this post but seemingly Mr. Nog did it before me. Though speculating about reps and filibusters is important and all, I'm a bit worried about how little people talk about each other. For myself, I'm going to sleep in a few hours, probably, and would really much like to see something else than rules discussion before I vote for a rep. I'll show example and talk about people after this post.

Originally Posted by Leggie

Yes, although at least for myself, I have decided to use this "two-day" (in fact) system and try to keep my opinons on people for myself for a bit longer than usual, i.e. voicing them only very late in the Day, because I want to make a clearer picture on everybody, not given just by first impressions (and as soon as I say "X looks suspicious" or simply evaluate somebody, it will create a reaction, which I don't want yet. I want to see everybody for a while in their "natural environment" as a mere observer. Call it an experiment for toDay).

That's all very well - except that if we all hold back our suspicions all Day and only voice them a bit before deadline, that will not only make it really difficult to choose a representative for the people around at deadline, forcing them to hasty decisions since they get all the information only just before they have to decide, but also makes deciding close to impossible for those who are not able to be around late in the Day. Of course it's not that bad if only one Leggie does that, but if we all operated that way, it would end up quite nasty. Immanuel Kant said: "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." That obviously makes you a sinner, which means you are a wolf. Easy, eh? (How come I have become so good at spotting wolves?)

I'll be back with more stuff. Beware.


EDIT: x-ed since, gasp, phantom's #101 - 13 posts before mine! Slow down, people. Really.

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

Any future direct quotation of Immanuel Kant shall result in modfire. *shudders*

[THE Ka]

Originally Posted by Boro88

History is an excuse for the faint of heart.

I'd have to agree in some extent to that. Change is inevitable, but some folks and truths are not. I guess after toDay we'll see how much change can happen, hopefully for the better.

Originally Posted by tp

You say we need a "strong" rep, and yet you don't think that reps who will vote independently and with conviction are a good choice?

That is massive contradiction.

I'm going to have to agree with tp on this one. It is definately comforting if someone is always voting for what their base wants, but I don't think we can put our feet up next to the fire entirely when a representative can have as many innocents as wolves in their ranks. The concerning thing is, they don't even have to know it.
I think we're forgetting that a leader is not their own island, and that the 'power supreme' is as much in their lobbyist as is themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if at least one representative had a few puppeteers to act for, and think they we're being free as a bird.

As my dad would say, It's not always the top of the totem pole that is the strongest.

On that note, I have to leave for awhile to take my feline child to the vet for a check up on her stitches. Should be back before any deadlines.

~ Ka

[the phantom]

Just to be clear...

Originally Posted by Legate

I said here several times, that I believe that Reps who are needed are strong, indeed, reliable people, about whom I am certain that they can make judgements in hard situations, for the good of the village.

My point was that earlier your precise reasoning for not wanting to pick me seemed to be that I fit this exact statement.

At the time you seemed to strongly favor a "weak" rep, who would do the will of the people. But then a couple other people made some points, and you appeared to flip-flop violently.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by the phantom

Just to be clear...

My point was that earlier your precise reasoning for not wanting to pick me seemed to be that I fit this exact statement.

At the time you seemed to strongly favor a "weak" rep, who would do the will of the people. But then a couple other people made some points, and you appeared to flip-flop violently.

Well, I hope you understood now from the post above (and hope there'll be no more x-posting anymore), that I have never said anything like you say, and never favoured, as you say, a "weak" rep. Just look at my first post.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Which is why I'm confused to why exactly you ruled out the phantom so soon? Explain it to me, was it a joke for some laughs, and a little fun at what you promised earlier? I mean really if we follow your logic for not wanting to choose the phantom right now, you can say that about anyone in this village. I see no reason you should trust anyone right now, but right off the bat you said it aint gonna be the phantom. You didn't exclude anyone else, just the phantom.

By no means am I saying the phantom should be a representative, but the question is why should we immediately exclude anyone? Because of the history? Are you afraid history will repeat itself if you make the same mistakes? Why does what Day we're on make any difference?

This is a clean slate, a brand new ball game. If I was to use such a weak excuse as "history" for not choosing a rep, I could come up with some cockamamy reason for anyone in this village except Ilya.

Okay, well, see, it's not like it will be only the phantom - I have more or less some list of players whom I would like to see as Reps and whom I would not, basically given on my experience with how they act in certain situations. That is no outdated history stuff, I believe you are not saying that I'd think something like "X was a Wolf last time, I am not going to vote him". But still, there are basically people I would dare to nominate and those I am - on first thought - reluctant to nominate, at least. Some I won't nominate - for the first Day at least - simply because I don't know them well enough (like Ilya whom I meet for the first time here). With some, I am reluctant, because I simply won't wish to rely on their judgement in hard situation. I named tp in particular because he's a classic character (and no hard feelings, hope, Mr. P. ) and because I told that before-game, right, but that did not serve as basis for my current stance towards him, but merely for a reason to name him in particular in my post. There are others, more, whom I would not vote right now, but I simply did not name them all. I would not have named any, most probably, had I not made that remark about tp before the game. Is that clear, I hope?

May I have a counter-question, Boro, though (if it is clear, if not, ask more) - what was your reason to ask me this? If you only could formulate why are you asking me about that, "why did I name tp in particular". Thank ye.

Originally Posted by the phantom

You say we need a "strong" rep, and yet you don't think that reps who will vote independently and with conviction are a good choice?

That is massive contradiction.

A strong rep will vote the way he feels. A weak rep will hide behind those that elected him.

Yes, that's what I said (several times) - and I would sign the thing you quoted from Nog, too. Maybe I just did not make myself clear. I said here several times, that I believe that Reps who are needed are strong, indeed, reliable people, about whom I am certain that they can make judgements in hard situations, for the good of the village. Not just for their own. That is simply, that I won't vote somebody whom I don't trust in the sense that he could vote just based on a whim or something. That was my point - the slight difference between "strong and independant" and "wilful". I can't think now how to phrase it better than that.

EDIT: x-ed since Phantom I quoted (i.e. with posts after #99)