Ten Year Anniversary Game: Living Thread

[mormegil]

++Macaclure

Sorry for the earlish vote, not sure what the rest of the night holds and wanted to make sure I get it in. He is the one that seems a bit off to me. I don't recall any previous encounters with him so my perspective is as unbiased as it can be but something in a number of the posts felt off, not the statistics though .

Hey, look I did the whole red highlight thing right!

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

I wish to cast the first stone (not that it would matter, since I've already voted for myself).

I am suspicious of Mac's pooh-poohing (is that a word? It is now!) phantom's plan of transferring information from the Dead to the Living without suggesting an alternative or even a modification to the original. While I've repeatedly stated that our two Wolf Packs would like to gain the same information as we have, in the end, the information matters far less to them than they do to us. In the absence of anything concrete, they'd just proceed with the business of killing everyone who isn't part of their Pack, which is a simpler plan than anything we as a village have right now.

Also, I was mildly suspicious of someone as well (thought it was Firefoot (Hi! ) but turns out not) who, admittedly, just didn't have as firm a grasp of the rules and may have suggested something perilous. I'll read again after doing my morning stuff to see who it was.

Also also, re Rune's 'plan' of 'lynching' Sepp Blatter, Nog's suggestion of lynching phantom would be the next best thing. (Not that I'm comparing the two in anyway whatsoever, but he's also a president/commissioner/insert-title-here of his own football federation.)

[Aganzir]

Well I'm home and I just want to go to sleep.

As of now, I have no idea who I should vote, and I'd actually still like a tie->no lynch today (only today, not every day, I don't even know who first twisted it that way). Let me explain once again why.

• Whether we lynch somebody on DAY 1 or not, the Dead can only start voting for role reveals on NIGHT 3. If we lynch now, they'll have to choose between 4 people. If we don't, there will only be 3. I see that we'd benefit from narrowing down the options. Especially as the role vote is the only way to find out dead people's alignment until the seer dies.
• To people who say voting and lynching is the "way this game is played" and the village's best option: under ordinary circumstances, yes. But in this game it means next to nothing. For the first, we just won't know if a lynch was successful or not. For the second, there are two wolf packs so no matter how essential a part you play in lynching a wolf, you may still be one yourself.
• Let's face it, the lynches are far from being our primary way of getting information in this game. The wolf kills are, and the Dead Thread and what happens in there (whether we find a way for the two threads to communicate or not, we will still learn something from who the Dead choose), and eventually hopefully the seer. I think it's more important to keep the Dead Thread under control as best we can and make it as difficult as possible for the wolves to mess it up than it is to lynch a poor random person on DAY 1 just to make a point.

If somebody would like to explain the actual benefits of lynching somebody today, I'm more than willing to reconsider, but as I see it, we're trying to apply old rules to a new concept.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Aganzir

(only today, not every day, I don't even know who first twisted it that way).

Wait... there are people taking it that way? Apparently, I missed that.

Just so we're clear, I was only in favour of no lynch today--even with the odds of a successful lynch being no better on subsequent days, I see those as a different situation entirely, since we have different evidence (that is, we HAVE evidence worth mentioning).

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Originally Posted by Phantom

I did this specifically because I knew certain folks would complain if they were asked to participate in anything resembling a plan.

I'm sure I don't have any idea what you're talking about.

In other news, there's an idea running that we shouldn't lynch today? I disagree. Our ability to remove wolves from the game is finite, and I don't think we ought to skip even one of our limited shots.

Now to type up a more substantial post, now that I'm back at the computer.

[Lalaith]

I'm a sentimental old so-and-so, and what I have always really hated about the first-day lynch nomination is that feeling of potentially spoiling someone's else's gaming fun on the very first day.. I'm glad for the Halls of Mandos option, in that respect as it does at least mean that all players can play on in some form or another....

So far, if I am not mistaken, we have all made contributions except for Gwathagor?
I've read through the thread twice, and I'm finding some people making sense in all the confusion, others just plain confusing. Instinctively, I take against this business of planned tied votes - nor do I like placing all our trust in the voices of the dead.

Well, it's my bedtime and I must vote. It may be because I'm very tired and stupid right now, but some of the most confusing posts for me so far have been Legate's. Not much to base a vote on I know, but on the first day it's as good a reason as any...
++LEGATE

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Aganzir

• Whether we lynch somebody on DAY 1 or not, the Dead can only start voting for role reveals on NIGHT 3. If we lynch now, they'll have to choose between 4 people. If we don't, there will only be 3. I see that we'd benefit from narrowing down the options. Especially as the role vote is the only way to find out dead people's alignment until the seer dies.
• To people who say voting and lynching is the "way this game is played" and the village's best option: under ordinary circumstances, yes. But in this game it means next to nothing. For the first, we just won't know if a lynch was successful or not. For the second, there are two wolf packs so no matter how essential a part you play in lynching a wolf, you may still be one yourself.
• Let's face it, the lynches are far from being our primary way of getting information in this game. The wolf kills are, and the Dead Thread and what happens in there (whether we find a way for the two threads to communicate or not, we will still learn something from who the Dead choose), and eventually hopefully the seer. I think it's more important to keep the Dead Thread under control as best we can and make it as difficult as possible for the wolves to mess it up than it is to lynch a poor random person on DAY 1 just to make a point.

One additional point:

• We're not the only people trying to take out wolves. Other wolves will do it too, purposefully or by accident, by night kills.

[Kuruharan]

Highlight, Lal, highlight!

[Thinlómien]

But first a step back:

Originally Posted by Agan

"We" obviously as in "us villagers", not as in "me and my wolf pack", duh! [winking smiley]

This still exchange related to this post by Agan sounds rather fishy to me. So, as I read it, Agan is playing with scenarios and makes a joking example of the village only killing (= lynching) Europeans. Morm makes fun of her by implying she actually suggested doing that (since she's European herself, it's kind of double crazy idea). Agan misunderstands that morm is (half-jokingly) calling her out on saying "killing" instead of "lynching", which would imply she's one of the wolves (the term "killing" usually referring to Night kills) and she continues the joke from that angle. Basically I find it curious that Agan would interpret morm's comments in a way that would lead her to make a joking clarification about not making a Freudian slip about being a wolf. Like, I don't know why an innocent player would look at morm's comment from that angle. (Morm please clarify if I'm the one misreading your comment to Agan.)

Okay then...

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Btw. how about we send the phantom into the Dead Thread as our first move? If he is innocent he is a great asset organizing things for us there - and there people could check his alignment (unlike here) so everyone would know whether to trust his ideas or not. It would be a win-win -situation.

I actually laughed aloud. (Also Greenie's reaction. Have I ever mentioned I love my family?)

Originally Posted by Rikae

Day 1 too often seems like the day to lynch anyone who behaves erratically, which is, to my recollection, a really bad strategy.

Or alternatively vote someone whom you always suspect, which is equally bad. For example I had to slap myself today getting bad vibes from Lottie - I always suspect her on Day1, regardless of her role. So I would actually encourage people to go for someone they usually don't suspect if they're wavering between two options as it's less likely they're just falling prey to knee-jerk reactions. (Later addition: okay, I see Rikae said practically the same. Should I start worrying about the number of people I'm aggressively agreeing with?)

Originally Posted by Form

In PRACTICE, however, the actual participation of the players starts with Day 1--in a real world, if werewolves started killing people in a closed community, we'd have a history of interaction with our neighbours on which to base our lynchings; in the game world, we have nothing but a Day 1 that precedes any actual choices made by the Wolves. The death of the moderator is presented as a fait accompli and we have to try and analyze the actions of people who never actually made any decision to kill that person.

Yes, but you forget the Night kills are hardly the only trail the wolves leave, and they are even less reliable in this game than in your average game since the roles are not revealed upon death. (Of course, the same goes for the usefulness of the lynches, but the lynches are our only weapon against the wolves, and while they might be killing each other, all the six wolves won't die without our help.)

Originally Posted by Greenie

So yes, we're statistically more likely to lynch an innocent than a wolf, but that is sadly not a feature of Day 1 but rather of the entire game.

^^ this.

Originally Posted by Mith

I don't think there has been much discussion of the wildcard role. Obviously it is hard to discuss an undescribed role but it is a known unknown, as Donald Rumsfeld would say, something we know we don't know. It holds strange powers some of which might well stuff up cleverclogs voting systems.

As you said, there's little use in discussing it now - however, it's good to keep in mind that if something doesn't add up in this game, it might be thanks to the special role.

Originally Posted by Eomer

certainly Lommy, Shasta, Nilp and Boro are never wasted lynches, if you ask me.

Wrong, sir, first off it's you and morm who are never wasted lynches and besides if you go to the grimoire I have an amazing track record of being an ordo in 90% of the games I've played in and a very successful seer in several games in the last 10%, so statistically speaking it's a very bad idea to lynch me.

Originally Posted by Agan

I think it's more important to keep the Dead Thread under control as best we can

I disagree. We cannot control the Dead Thread. I've been thinking about this and what I would do if I died and had to vote on the dead thread. First off, I would be likely to start lazing because following two threads and general frustration at being dead, ugh. (I'm being honest here.) Being the good citizen I am, I'd still probably get as far as voting. Now, would I follow the instructions of the living? Possibly, unless we dead people had a better idea. How to convey that to the living? And - I'm emphasizing this again - whose instructions would I follow? Say, the phantom suggests a course of action for the dead thread. Six living people state they agree. Four state they disagree. The rest don't comment. Now, are the living to assume the dead then followed the instructions? How could they know? Or what if two living players had two different ideas for what the dead should do and there was no clear consensus? Whose idea would the dead follow then? And how would the living ever deduce whose idea the dead went with?

Seriously, unless we elect a living village spokesperson or something, there's no way of clearly communicating with the dead. The best we can do is probably use our knowledge of the personalities and the playing styles of the deceased and try to guess what those particular players would do, but that's a little risky. In short, we shouldn't make decisions based on how we can use the dead thread until we have found a way to do so, because it's possible we'll never find one.


edit: xed with Lalaith and onwards

[the phantom]

Tentative list thus far...

Obviously innocent and awesome.
the phantom

Probably innocent and rather cool.
Aganzir
Boro
Sally
Nilp

Hmmm... Innocent?
Rune
Nerwen
Morm
Form
Eomer

Not today. Maybe later.
Green
Rikae
Mith
McCaber
Legate
Shasta
Lommy
Kath
Gwath
Lalaith

Up for lynching consideration.
Nogrod
Loslote
Mac
Firefoot

[Macalaure]

Originally Posted by Nilp

I am suspicious of Mac's pooh-poohing (is that a word? It is now!) phantom's plan of transferring information from the Dead to the Living without suggesting an alternative or even a modification to the original.

Oh no no, that's not correct:

Originally Posted by me

The dead should give their extra vote to either A: someone they have reason to believe is innocent; or B: someone who has voted for someone they have reason to believe is guilty. This will give us a solid bit of information to go on, actually.

I make lists because lists is what I make.

Feeling solid enough, for now:
Rikae, Firefoot, Nilp, Legate, Greenie

Somewhere under the radar, way down low
Sally, McCaber, Loslote, Lommy, Lalaith, Eomer, Shasta, Mith, Kath (so many )

Not sure what to do with
Boro, Nogrod, Nerwen, phantom (That's four heavy hitters in there... not happy with the composition of this group.)

Very slightly somewhat suspicious in a vaguely kinda-sorta way
Aganzir - her reply (#69) to morm felt off to me.
Rune - seems a bit more tense than necessary
mormegil - I was originally going to put him under the radar, until I realized I was about to put morm under the radar. Can't be, especially since he did post a few times.

MIA
Gwathagor

[Nogrod]

Form – if you wait for chances to get over 50-50 with lynching you’d need to give up lynching altogether: unless a seer reveals with some solid background knowledge on her/his status, every lynch is less than that.

I think I can see where you come from though (D1 chances are lowish), but trying to lynch people gives one the data one needs to make any inferences. So even if the chances aren’t near 50-50 (rather like 1/3 to 1/4 in practise) on Day1, just saying "let’s skip this Day" will give the wolves a free ride to do their mayhem and us others more or less clueless.

Many Day1 lynches have been unfortunate for the villagers, but more often than not very useful when backtracking on who voted who and why - and even if we can't enjoy the results of those ponderings here in the Living Thread immediately or as such to begin with, the Dead can use them. Let's not focus solely on us living on this Day1 but also in the wider scale - the Dead can use a lot of info if we give it to them. If we do not vote or make excuses to make ties there is little to tell in comparison with a situation where someone is actually facing leaving this thread - a chance nastier for the wolves than for the ordos.

Yes this game is a different beast as Agan reminded, but it is a different one also because the lynched and other dead will keep on playing - and in the end the game will be more or less decided - and is more interesting to play - in the Dead Thread (if it goes far enough). So I might just wish to stick into some gaming principles: do what you can to win and encourage others to play - that's the only way peolpe leave marks to be analysed - for the living or for the dead.

[Thinlómien]

Okay, now seriously kinda thinking about it.

What if we actually elected (toMorrow, as it's getting late toDay) a village spokesperson to direct the dead thread? Or come up with a system where people could volunteer to be the spokesperson and we'd rotate the turn between them?

And everybody would pinky swear that when they're dead, they'd obey the village spokesperson?

That way, we could get about ...80...? percent reliable information from the dead thread, if there isn't an obvious pitfall I didn't see. (Apart from that I don't know how we'd ever get everyone to participate in the spokesperson election and pledging to serve the living in the afterlife.)


edit: xed with Mac and Nog

[Kuruharan]

Just as a note, I'm going to count Lal's vote since she has probably collapsed in bed.

But please, everyone, remember to highlight your votes. Some days I will only have time for a quick read and count before posting narrations to move the game along so it is very helpful to me if your votes stand out.

Thanks.

[the phantom]

Lommy- as far as the village spokesperson thing, I'm willing to immediately jump on board the instant anyone offers an appropriate array of options to the Dead (allowing them to influence the outcome & pass information). Whoever lists sensible options is "the spokesperson" as far as I am concerned. But to list quality options we must first know where the lynch seems headed, meaning we can't be holding votes until the final hour so that we have time to provide the Dead with their choices and let them vote.

Basically if we vote in a timely fashion anyone around should be able to feel out a sensible offering to the Dead, and so long as there isn't a glaring problem with the options the Living can just put their stamp on the plan (thus making the consensus clear to the Dead).

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

I disagree. We cannot control the Dead Thread.

Exactly. And the Dead might not wish to be controlled either - they probably even have a better idea about what is going on than people in the living thread and will see the follies we here, or some of us, might think as wisdom.

So I'd be cautious of trying to make deals here on the living thread concerning what to do here based on ideas that the dead will follow rules we set to them - or rules suggested by some willing gamechangers.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Form – if you wait for chances to get over 50-50 with lynching you’d need to give up lynching altogether: unless a seer reveals with some solid background knowledge on her/his status, every lynch is less than that.

It's not the odds alone that have me--obviously, if we lynch no one at all, the odds of us winning on Gifteds alone, even with the Wolves killing each other--approaches near-impossible odds.

Arguing that the odds never improve does less to convince me than something Thinlómien said:

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Yes, but you forget the Night kills are hardly the only trail the wolves leave, and they are even less reliable in this game than in your average game since the roles are not revealed upon death. (Of course, the same goes for the usefulness of the lynches, but the lynches are our only weapon against the wolves, and while they might be killing each other, all the six wolves won't die without our help.)

It's not so much that I forgot that the kills weren't revealed as that I'd somehow failed to take that into account in thinking about statistics. Though, now that I am thinking about it, I'm not sure I've changed my mind so much as I've become even more confused.

Whatever the odds, we won't know if we've killed a wolf or innocent today--nor will we know the identities of the victims toNight. So... does it make more sense to play the odds straight (and avoid lynching toDay) or to take the shotgun approach and kill everyone available and hope that when the dust clears we've killed more than they have?

So, while I agree with Nog that backtrackings are valuable... do we have long enough to wait for them? My inclinations are leaning more than ever to lynching no one today, but I'm getting to the point of thinking I have nothing more than gut feeling to go by there.

[Formendacil]

Am I just stating the obvious when I ask what happens if the village spokesman ends up being a wolf? What sort of fail-safes are there if we choose a wolf for such a role.

[Thinlómien]

Okay then the list:

The Good
Rikae - so far so good, seems calm and collected which (sorry dear) Wolfkae often isn't
Mac - well I think I'm usually fairly good at reading him and he seems ok atm
Firefoot - somehow seems pretty good to me or whatsoever no specific reason
morm - I actually think he might be innocent this time?
Nilp - as I see it: self-voted because it was expected of him, since then has been very reasonable and seemingly genuinely trying to figure out what's good for the village
Legate - seems more like his innocent self than not, would not bet large sums of money on it though

The Bad
Sally - under my radar, and in a manner that makes me think of sneaky Sallywolves of the past
Agan - her little "slip" and he shameless advocation of no lynch make me raise my eyebrows to say the least

The Ugly (err sorry I mean the in-between category )
Form - I disagree with his reasoning, but that has nothing to do with his role
Gwath - where art thou?
McCaber - insufficient data
Lottie - acknowledging the fact my bad vibes are probably kneejerk, if they persist, I will have a better look at her
Boro - ...he posted?? in an uncharacteristically unnoticeable manner, then!
Nogrod - so far looking like his usual sinister self and making a lot of sense
Nerwen - all I've got on her is "I hope she votes toDay"
Rune - he seems a little... grumpy? nervous? negative? but then again isn't that why we love him
Lalaith - no idea yet, just happy she's playing after a loooooooooong time *waves*
Eomer - seems fairly fine for Eomer actually, haha, but not good enough to be in the good category
Shasta - could be either way, as always
the phantom - I actually think he looks pretty innocent at this point, but he can thank his reputation for me still keeping my eye on him
Mith - innocentish vibes, slightly curiously started talking about the special role out of the blue (throwaway topic, even though that matters a lot less than in an ordinary game)
Greenie - is a meanie, and very sharp, and I adore her, but I'm absolutely not trusting her
Kath - goes to the "has hardly been here" category


edit: xed with da phants and onwards

[the phantom]

Form- if a WW ends up being "spokesperson" I don't really care so long as his communication with the Dead is similar to what I would've put. I mean- it's not like he can just give harmful instructions, because we'll all see them and call BS and the Dead will witness it.

[Nogrod]

At 2am my time I think it's beginning to be a time to wrap it up for my part for toDay.


First: the wolves are not too keen on passing to the realm of the dead. They will fight, at least a little, to not be lynched. An ordo would have no problems changing realms as the game will be quite intense and fun in the Dead Thread in a couple of days time.

Second: the living can't control the thread of the dead and should not imagine they can. the dead are much wiser than the living so even an idea that looks pretty nice in the living thread might be folly seen from the POV of the dead. So let's not fall into hybris here that we know how to handle any forthcoming situations.

Third: the dead thread will be confusing as well. With three possible deaths per day/night -cycle and them being able to check only one during the same interval there will be more unknowns than known people in there (as the Night-kills aren't automatically innocents).

Fourth: if you want to talk of probabilities, the probability of the wolves just nicely killing each other is something like zero. So we should use our weapon which is lynching. And if we make a mistake (which we're bound to do) the people we lynch will still be on the dead thread and can play it from there - being able to try and catch the wolves with their possible knoweldge of the dead wolves.

Fifth: enter all the visits to and fro between the realms, mystery-roles etc. aka. let's just hunt some wolves toDay and try to make more informed tactical decisions later when we have something better to base them on.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

The village spokesperson could be a for-the-DAY position, so that

a) we don't leave the Village in a single person's hand for too long;
b) we can have an additional test re the Dead thread role-knowing thingy. That is, 'vote for Person X if NIGHT kill A was a Wolf, vote for Person Y if NIGHT kill B was a Wolf, vote for person Z if previous DAY's lynch was a Wolf, AND vote for person W if the current spokesperson is a Wolf. If neither are Wolves, vote for person N.'

[Kath]

I have read through the thread and what I have mostly come away with is a vague feeling of horrible nostalgia for my dissertation results section from years back thanks to all these statistics. I am with Greenie, English please!

I am unconvinced about our ability to communicate with the Dead Thread at all. Indeed apart from those roles with the ability to come back and therefore report about what is going on in there, I can't see how we would get any information between the two threads. But I also hadn't realised what aganzir said about Dead Thread voting not starting til Night 3 anyway, which means the fewer people sent there the better really, excepting wolves.

Therefore I am happy to throw my two pence in for this tied lynch toDay. Deadline is late on a school night so this is it for me. Am on mobile so can't check and see how the votes are going but Form volunteered for the position so:

++Formendacil

Hoping that highlights ...

EDIT: It worked. Also fixed an accidental capital letter.

[Aganzir]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

xed with Agan - ...WHAT???? I smell Freud... but whatever I'll look at it when I'm back

What, did I say something oedipal?

I like Rikae and phantom and won't be voting for either today. Greenie and Nog make sense but I'm slightly wary of them. Form makes me laugh. A little bit uneasy about Rune for no particular reason except I vaguely disagree with his stuff and am not impressed with calling Greenie annoying.

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

Like, I don't know why an innocent player would look at morm's comment from that angle

ThinLOLmien is back! So I'm, what, your second oldest friend and suddenly you don't understand why I'd look at something from the villain's point of view? I understood morm's meaning perfectly and chose to continue the joke as I did because it's fun and joking about being a wolf is the closest I can get to being one.

Seriously though, just what would a wolf gain from saying "Hello I'm a wolf" when it would lead the other pack straight to her door? I'd imagine in a game like this, they will go to lengths to look as ordinary as possible, and I just don't understand why you think I'd have reacted like that as a wolf. Granted I'm tired but your trigger-happy jump is so poorly reasoned it genuinely annoys me and gives you a free ride to the top of my suspect list.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Exactly. And the Dead might not wish to be controlled either - they probably even have a better idea about what is going on than people in the living thread and will see the follies we here, or some of us, might think as wisdom.

You're forgetting something. We are the Dead Thread. In a few days we will all be feasting in Valhalla (for we are shiny). We're not thinking of ruling a foreign entity, we're thinking of ways to deliver information back to ourselves.

Remember that we don't need to share all the information we gain with the living - only if we find out somebody is a predator. I'm thinking how to do that but odds are I need to go to bed before I come to any conclusions.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Am I just stating the obvious when I ask what happens if the village spokesman ends up being a wolf? What sort of fail-safes are there if we choose a wolf for such a role.

Actually, it's not a problem if the village spokesperson is a wolf. He needs to state what the dead should do to communicate what on the thread, and if the dead have agreed to comply, they will communicate that. The wolf can tell the dead to give us information that he thinks would be misleading or useful for the wolves, but he has to do it in a manner that won't give away his role. So, there's little danger in that, unless of course say two wolves of the pack are dead and the third is the spokesperson, and they have prearranged to give the village false information of a specific sort, but really how likely is that?

I think the bigger problem remains that both the living and the dead should be happy with the spokesperson arrangement. The phantom suggested the dead should have leeway in the arrangement which theoretically would be good, but in practice I only see it as making the system (even more) unreliable. So the way I see it, either the (future) dead pledge themselves to drudgery and assisting the village, or then we will have rather unreliable information. Personally I prefer the first option out of the two, but a middle ground would of course be the most profitable (also because I'm a little worried the dead won't be motivated to participate if participating only means doing as you're told).

I think we can keep talking about it toMorrow, though, and shouldn't get too sidetracked as we still need to vote toDay. (Not trying to start a discussion and kill it instantly, but rather speaking as an East European whose bedtime is past already...)


edit: xed with everyone

[satansaloser2005]

Ah yes, now I remember why I don't ignore the thread for several hours. O_O

I'm here, and I'm reading, but I have to go again in half an hour or so and will either vote by that time or not at all.

[Mithalwen]

Kath it was not a throw away topic just a reminder that it might be mistaken in thinking that we can stitch up the voting to avoid a tie. I didn't notice any other mention and while we can't get very far discussing something which has unknown properties it shouldn't there fore be ignored to the point it is forgotten.

[Nilpaurion Felagund]

We're not trying to control the Dead thread, people. We're giving them a framework under which to give us the information they gain while the thread is still an academic exercise. I'm pretty sure (as Mac had also said) that the plans presented probably wouldn't survive first contact with a living, voting Dead villager. But at least we're letting them know of a way of giving us information without having to rely too heavily on the resurrecting Gifteds.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

As far as the dead thread goes, personally, I think the following;

- that we, as the living, should leave the running of the dead thread to the dead players
- that we should, however, have some way of deriving information from the effects the dead thread can have on the living thread
- that, honestly, I don't really know how the two above points can be reconciled.

I can think of one primary hurdle that any plan to have the dead give us information with their extra vote every day will have to overcome - what if voting for the person the dead actually want to vote for will end up causing the living players to think erroneously, based on whatever plan is set up?

For example, say the Seer is dead and has claimed Person X as innocent, and that Person Y is a wolf. In the Living thread, Person Z has voted for Person Y, but earlier, it was stated that if the dead give their extra vote to Person Z, it should signify that Person X is a wolf.

I can't think of any real way to circumvent this problem at the moment, but it's definitely a real one (sort of like getting Manwe lynched after my death during my first run-through as Seer ).

[mormegil]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

But first a step back:
This still exchange related to this post by Agan sounds rather fishy to me. So, as I read it, Agan is playing with scenarios and makes a joking example of the village only killing (= lynching) Europeans. Morm makes fun of her by implying she actually suggested doing that (since she's European herself, it's kind of double crazy idea). Agan misunderstands that morm is (half-jokingly) calling her out on saying "killing" instead of "lynching", which would imply she's one of the wolves (the term "killing" usually referring to Night kills) and she continues the joke from that angle. Basically I find it curious that Agan would interpret morm's comments in a way that would lead her to make a joking clarification about not making a Freudian slip about being a wolf. Like, I don't know why an innocent player would look at morm's comment from that angle. (Morm please clarify if I'm the one misreading your comment to Agan.)

Home and trying to catch up I'm to this point...Being on the East Coast makes the timing on these quite different than when I was out West...anyway

Yes, it was said in a joking way as I thought it sounded very funny. Her response I took as a bit of a joke too but her follow up reaction raises and eyebrow or two.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Nilpaurion Felagund

So mistress Rikae has already addressed the exact same points I have in post 90, just in a more succinct and understandable manner.

I should be going back to sleep, I guess.

I prefer gender neutral terms... but thanks for the "succinct and understandable" bit.

Originally Posted by Nilp

I am suspicious of Mac's pooh-poohing (is that a word? It is now!) phantom's plan of transferring information from the Dead to the Living without suggesting an alternative or even a modification to the original.

I am somewhat suspicious of it, too. And of Lommy's.

As long as there are at least three players in each wagon, there will always be a way for the dead to opt out of phantom's plan: simply give the extra vote to someone who isn't on the list.

For instance, let's say Nilp, Nog and I voted for Mac, while Mith, Agan and phantom voted for Lommy.

We tell the dead "give phantom or Rikae the extra vote if Legate was guilty, give Nilp or Mith the extra vote if Legate was innocent" (and yes, I think we can coordinate enough to make such a message clear. Anyone muddying the waters will only look wolfish)

If the dead know nothing about Legate, they can simply choose between Nog and Agan for the extra vote, depending on what they think of Mac and Lommy. Seems pretty flexible.

Originally Posted by Agan

If somebody would like to explain the actual benefits of lynching somebody today, I'm more than willing to reconsider, but as I see it, we're trying to apply old rules to a new concept.

Because, firstly, we have a chance to lynch a wolf: a chance that, historically, is nearly as good (or might even be as good, given the confidence interval) as on Day 2.
Besides, if people are relying on learning much from the night kills toMorrow (not that I ever put that much faith in night-kill analysis anyway), that doesn't apply now. We won't know the roles.

Second, it forces people to leave trails.

Edit: x'd with everybody since Nog #132

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Am I just stating the obvious when I ask what happens if the village spokesman ends up being a wolf? What sort of fail-safes are there if we choose a wolf for such a role.

Before anyone gives me a solid argument why we should go for an imagined "village spokesman" and do what s/he says, or think the dead will follow her/his thoughts / advice / commands / position (aka. that we should interpret what the dead mean based upon whether they give the "spokesperson" the extra-vote or not), I'll be against it and do my best to thwart any actions proposed or interpretations of facts based on such an entity whether living or dead - unless, of course, there is this solid argument why I should think otherwise.

I'm not willing to tie my hands at this point of the game to any such folly - or willing to give any lycantrophe a get-away basing her/his actions or words on a such a thing.

We need to trust our wits and ability to think clearly - which this gang should be capable of - and not tie our hands into some general plans and rules (or give the baddies a chance to claim they did it) some people come by on Day1.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

I began reading what I cross-posted with and had an immediate reaction to this statement of Nogrod's:

Originally Posted by Nogrod

First: the wolves are not too keen on passing to the realm of the dead. They will fight, at least a little, to not be lynched. An ordo would have no problems changing realms as the game will be quite intense and fun in the Dead Thread in a couple of days time.

I completely disagree. Whether or not the Dead Thread is as fun as the Living Thread is not the issue here; the issue is that if an ordo is about to be lynched, they know for a fact that a wolf is not. They should absolutely fight to not be lynched.

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Before anyone gives me a solid argument why we should go for an imagined "village spokesman" and do what s/he says, or think the dead will follow her/his thoughts / advice / commands / position (aka. that we should interpret what the dead mean based upon whether they give the "spokesperson" the extra-vote or not), I'll be against it and do my best to thwart any actions proposed or interpretations of facts based on such an entity whether living or dead - unless, of course, there is this solid argument why I should think otherwise.

I'm not willing to tie my hands at this point of the game to any such folly - or willing to give any lycantrophe a get-away basing her/his actions or words on a such a thing.

We need to trust our wits and ability to think clearly - which this gang should be capable of - and not tie our hands into some general plans and rules (or give the baddies a chance to claim they did it) some people come by on Day1.

In general, I agree with this--which, considering we've disagreed on the merits of lynching on Day 1, and given that agreeing with Nog is historically somewhat troubling, I find somewhat disconcerting. However, since we're trying (against all Day 1 conventions) to think rationally, I shall not not let that sway against my prior thoughts unduly. At best, I think the spokesman idea likely to be one that easily goes astray. At worst, it allows living wolves to steer the village into an obsession with a semi-certainty.

[Aganzir]

It's way past 2 and I have work tomorrow.

I liked Nog's points in #141, but Shasta has a good point as well.

Originally Posted by Nilpaurion Felagund

The village spokesperson could be a for-the-DAY position, so that

a) we don't leave the Village in a single person's hand for too long;
b) we can have an additional test re the Dead thread role-knowing thingy. That is, 'vote for Person X if NIGHT kill A was a Wolf, vote for Person Y if NIGHT kill B was a Wolf, vote for person Z if previous DAY's lynch was a Wolf, AND vote for person W if the current spokesperson is a Wolf. If neither are Wolves, vote for person N.'

Something like this could work. However we'd still face the risk of lynching somebody we didn't want as a result. And if we do decide to employ this system, we need to make sure the dead have a sufficient number of options for situations where information can't for some reason be delivered.

I'm only worried about wolves hijacking the information delivery system - even if it only happens once, the results may be severe.

Anyway bedtime.

++Lommy

She saw a straw and grasped at it.

Her village spokesperson idea was decent but I'm partly kind of offended that she chose to question my intelligence by holding a joke against me and partly suspicious of her "ERMAHGERD SLIP!!!111 Did ya see a SLIP!!!111" approach which would probably feel forced to me even if it wasn't about me.

I'm still in favour of the no-lynch, but I wouldn't mind seeing Lommy bite the dust.

[Nogrod]

About the Dead.

The goodie-dead will try to make the village win - the evil-dead will try to help their wolfpack first and fight against the innocents in general (aka. possibly siding with their rivals if the situation is benefical for it).


The dead will give an extra-vote to someone.

Based on their knowledge and ratios between the good and the evil - and the knowledge they have on each other and therefore the trust they share or do not - they'll give it to someone based on their vote.

So there are a lot of factors as to what ends up being their "decision".

If the goodies rule there, then in the best case they'll most probably give the extra-vote to someone who they deem innocent and whose extra-vote would lynch a baddie they think or know is one - whatever the Living say or think they can require them to do - or what any "spokesperson" nominated by some villagers does.

But then there are a hundred of "buts"...

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Agan

ThinLOLmien is back! So I'm, what, your second oldest friend and suddenly you don't understand why I'd look at something from the villain's point of view? I understood morm's meaning perfectly and chose to continue the joke as I did because it's fun and joking about being a wolf is the closest I can get to being one.

Seriously though, just what would a wolf gain from saying "Hello I'm a wolf" when it would lead the other pack straight to her door? I'd imagine in a game like this, they will go to lengths to look as ordinary as possible, and I just don't understand why you think I'd have reacted like that as a wolf. Granted I'm tired but your trigger-happy jump is so poorly reasoned it genuinely annoys me and gives you a free ride to the top of my suspect list.

1) I dislike my I'm-not-taking-myself-too-seriously personality being used as a way to discredit my arguments (like, I may be chatty and benevolent and a bit of a clown, but it doesn't mean I'm stupid and you know it and you're trying to use it to your advantage by framing this as "silly Lommy is being silly again" and that irks me)

2) I didn't suggest you intentionally said "hello I'm a wolf" (even though - now that you played the "why would a wolf say that" card I might reconsider...), I suggest you made a Freudian slip of sorts by accidentally revealing your wolvish perspective. And that has absolutely nothing to do with whether you fancy being a villain or not.

3) Well, you also cemented your - rather whimsically assigned; it was the typical Day1 level of reasoning - place on the top of my suspicion list by being so defensive. If you were innocent, you wouldn't be half as annoyed by me remarking on your wolvish perspective, and I suspect you're just enjoying your wolfing in this game with a nice pack and even the tiniest prospect that your enjoyment might be cut short both makes you fight back and gets on your nerves because you dislike being "busted" on something so trivial, especially if you indeed intentionally chose to comment on morm's joke from that angle and I was accusing you on the wrong grounds.

++Agan

This is undoubtedly the best lead I have toDay.


edit: xed with everyone after Sally

[mormegil]

It's interesting to me how much discussion has been around the dead thread and how little has been around who is looking suspicious. The thought of trying to control the dead thread from the living is somewhat absurd, really. I understand that there are many well thought out and reasoned discussions around this but the reality is there will be many unknown variables and situations that present themselves. Suffice it that the dead thread will be doing their best to influence their team to win and little what we say or ask will change their mind.

This whole day has been spent talking about the dead thread, and dang it, it now has me talking more about it. I think there is certainly wolfish influence in this. I actually don't suspect Tummy of it, even though he started the whole blasted conversation. He has a way of hijacking the first day to discuss his plans...really he tries to put in measures of control. I would think those who have helped continue the conversation are those who we should be looking at.

I can't remember who mentioned Mith and her comments about the special role. This didn't strike me as odd. It seemed very much in line and a fairly appropriate topic of discussion albeit pure speculation on the role itself. That role has made me think though I imagine it is to help us as I think Kuru felt the balance might have been too much in the favor of the wolves at this point. But again, that's just my speculation. What it can do is beyond my reasoning to figure out.

As far as suspicious:

Mac (obviously, I did vote for him)
Kath--Too little posting for my tastes and a long history
Nog--He continued the dead thread discussion while seeming very reasonable and thoughtful about it. That was the behavior that made me nervous.

A few others but I'll have to go back and review to pinpoint some detail.

[mormegil]

Ah yes, Agan is also behaving oddly to me.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I should probably just post a list of what I think about different people at the moment, but since I had already made notes (in fact making part of them during the afternoon while I was attending a roleplaying session and trying to kill a Quarut at the same time, and later on the bus home), I am going to just post them here, also for completion's sake. I still have to read through most of the last page properly, but should be back in a moment...

Aside from the "tie or not to tie" discussion and so on, of the moments that "stood out", the only weird thing about the Agan-Morm exchange to me was Greenie's reaction to it, "defensive" one:

Originally Posted by A Little Green

I don't smell Freud as much as a trolling Agan. Admittedly, I took morm's "Agan, what are you suggesting here" as not a reference to her use of "we" but to her hypothesis of the Dead Thread only being populated by Europeans, and in that regard her reply doesn't really make sense. That doesn't equal Freud-odor, though.

Just kinda defensive, because I think it seemed pretty clear that it was not meant the way Greenie is interpreting it???

As for my stance on the Day 1-tie idea, I am actually with what Nog and Greenie mentioned somewhere halfway page 3: the chance to lynch a Wolf are still good, the chance to lynch a Gifted considerably smaller, AND it will give us some info to start with, instead of zero info. We'll at least see whom different people voted, or whom they did not vote.

I perfectly understand Form's objections against it and understand his sentiment, but I am personally against the "Day 1 are useless, boo!" (which fortunately didn't appear in this game, thanks to the activity of many) because it's only that attitude which actually makes them useless. And especially in this game, once again saying the same, so chaotic game, any piece of info helps.

Because everyone can talk all they want about whether to have a tie or not, or about gardening, or about Kant, but your actions show what you truly are, not your words. Point.

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I don't think there has been much discussion of the wildcard role. Obviously it is hard to discuss an undescribed role but it is a known unknown, as Donald Rumsfeld would say, something we know we don't know. It holds strange powers some of which might well stuff up cleverclogs voting systems.

Good to keep that in mind, but as also Lommy has said, probably not yet the time to speculate much about it. I hope the hidden role is not a Cobbler. That would seriously mess everything up so much more. (Though if so, I'd know of a good candidate... somebody who's filled half the thread with his posts. Even though they were actually constructive. But in large doses, everything becomes just spam.)

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

The individual empowered by the Dead gets two votes. And has also been alluded to in subsequent conversation, this will be noted in the narration and the individual so empowered will be mentioned explicitly by name.

You didn't use the clearest wording again, O Great Mod. But since you used the word "empowered", so does it mean that unknown person actually gets the extra "weight" to their vote? So if I am the one selected by the Dead, and I vote for the Phantom, the Phantom suddenly jumps up as the candidate for the lynch by two votes instead of just one? Because I was all the time under the impression that the fellow gets simply one more vote leading to his death. Apparently not???

Post with what I actually think of people coming soon.

EDIT: x-ed since about... somewhere around Kath's vote, and I didn't really even read all the posts around it properly yet, like I said. Gotta read everything here now.