Ten Year Anniversary Game: Living Thread

[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 ).

[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.

[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.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by mormegil

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.

Y'know, I don't think there is. At least, not that much. Just going by my past villainous proclivities, in situations like this - where the rules are so complex - I reckon wolves are sitting back and letting people talk.

And I know I'm playing that game too; but it's not through evil intentions, rather difficulty in imagining all these brilliant plans. But wolves don't need to get involved.

This Agan/Lommy thing - I don't buy it. Wolves don't need to be in the spotlight today. No way.

It's probably dogma, but I'm not picking any of you loudmouths today.

[Loslote]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

This Agan/Lommy thing - I don't buy it. Wolves don't need to be in the spotlight today. No way.

It's probably dogma, but I'm not picking any of you loudmouths today.

If Agan, Lommy, Nog, etc. were quiet and in the background, it would be the biggest tip-off you could get that they were evil. Some players have playing styles such that they can't get away with hiding in the back on Day 1, even if it is the traditional route for wolves. I wouldn't rule them out just because of that.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Loslote

If Agan, Lommy, Nog, etc. were quiet and in the background, it would be the biggest tip-off you could get that they were evil. Some players have playing styles such that they can't get away with hiding in the back on Day 1, even if it is the traditional route for wolves. I wouldn't rule them out just because of that.

Eh...I'm not sure. This whole Agan/Lommy thing? Seems a bit haphazard to me. Could have been avoided easily if they wanted - I couldn't even tell why there was an argument until multiple posts in - and wolves tend to want to avoid the spotlight.

[Rikae]

Well, the best hunch I have at the moment, and I hope I'm not alone in it.

Aside from general "vibes", the kill/lynch quibble with Aganzir looked really fabricated to me.

++Lommy

[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.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

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?

Yes, the Empowered Person gets their one vote doubled to two.

[Formendacil]

The Agan/Lommy fracas smells fishy to me, but that's one of those hindsight things I doubt I'll have a sense for until a couple Days have passed: they could be in cahoots or they could even both be innocent--but I doubt that latter one. One of them is probably a wolf.

It has occurred to me to make a list of people and rate them based on my impressions--but more than half the village would fall under "hasn't said enough for me to have any idea."

Still, I suppose bedtime is nearing (and my attention flagging as it approaches), so I should start to think about who to vote for. It seems the village tends away from a tied vote, so while I prefer that as a plan, I should probably come up with a Plan B.

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

It has occurred to me to make a list of people and rate them based on my impressions--but more than half the village would fall under "hasn't said enough for me to have any idea."

Well, did you see my list?

Originally Posted by Rikae

It doesn't require elaborate choosing of spokespeople, just an agreement well before the deadline. The strategy won't make sense if the village gets very small, because the extra vote will carry too much weight in its own right, but early on, it could be very valuable.

It's interesting how many people are arguing that it either can't be done or is somehow oppressive. And by interesting, I mean suspicious.

I'm only skeptical how the village will reach an agreement that the dead consider enough of an agreement to act on it. Then again, given how we're toDay kind of sliding towards an agreement that we'll vote as normal and not try to orchestrate a tie, maybe you're right and I'm just being pessimistic. The bottom line being (sorry for being the Captain Obvious here!) we can't of course know whether an "organic" direction by the living towards the dead thread will work or not until we've tried it. (There is a voice in my head asking if we'll know it even after we've tried it, but I'm getting too tired to think it through.)

As for those who consider such direction oppressive, well, I think it's an emotional knee-jerk reaction, and while I don't think they've thought it through, I can definitely see where they're coming from so I don't personally find it very suspicious.

Originally Posted by Nog

The Phantom then would be really cool Day1 wolf-lynch, something worth an anniversary -game!

We can hardly pat ourselves on the back for lynching the phantomwolf on Day1 if we do it just because he's the phantom. Also I'm starting to get a little suspicious of Nog's push to lynch the phantom despite not even suspecting him. Just, why would you do that?

Originally Posted by Nog

which goes for Lommy too (even if I do wonder her insistence on the spokesperson -idea)

Just nitpicking a little, I didn't insist on the spokesperson idea, I merely suggested it. But for the record I think it's still worth thinking about, even though I can't really see how it would be orchestrated without wasting a horrible amount of time and energy. It's very much worth keeping in mind if we ever have a known innocent though.

In any case, I'm going to sleep now as it's past 3am (oops - how I've missed werewolf! ). Choose well.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

We can hardly pat ourselves on the back for lynching the phantomwolf on Day1 if we do it just because he's the phantom. Also I'm starting to get a little suspicious of Nog's push to lynch the phantom despite not even suspecting him. Just, why would you do that?

I agree it's not the most beautiful way of getting rid of a phantomwolf on D1 to do it "just because" - but it would be a remarkable deed anyway.

But looking at this game (with the Dead Thread aka. no one is actually booted out of the game - and that changes everything) I still wonder how differently people think. I mean I'm happy to go to the Dead Thread as I have nothing to worry (if I'm lynched no gifted is lynched - and lynching a wolf is anyway a remarkable deed - so an innocent goes every now and then) and I think an innocent tp would think the same as well. But he clearly doesn't - and that's why I suspect him.

So Lommy: I do suspect him and made the point in my post up there (#172) - like Agan he was overly defensive in his quick reactions.

Originally Posted by Rikae

Nog, the only way it's flimsy and far-fetched is if someone insists on jumping in and arguing needlessly about what vote should mean what (and anyone who does that looks very, very furry). As long as the dead have enough options, whatever the first person says should be fine.

It may be I'm missing something from this ingenious plan of yours, but it looks dowright doomed. Why would the dead pick the choices of the living? Why would they go for a "neutral voter" if they had better plans? How would we orchestrate it that they'd be forced to do our picking? How do you tell, if the "decision" of the dead is made by well informed majority of innocents?

The dead will basically know 1/3 of the roles - well alignments - there's a lot of rom for distraction, tom-foolery, laziness, well made plots etc. to twist the vote of the dead not being what the Living would like it to be - or think they could interpret it to be.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Yes, the Empowered Person gets their one vote doubled to two.

Thanks for the clarification, Kuru.

Anyway, as for the matter at hand - suddenly I feel the sleep is really coming at me, and it's really getting deeply late. (I do not understand the Finnish people, since it's even one hour more there than where I am at the moment.) My brain simply can't work any more, so just a few quick points.

I am probably going to vote for Greenie, she really strikes me as the most suspicious person toDay.

As for the sudden Lommy-Agan row, aside from probable tiredness of both. It of course is possible that the escalation might be coming from one of them being a Wolf; if so, then personally I'd say Agan. But because it might be really just an escalation of absolute nonsense, I am not really inclined to vote for either just because of that. That said...

Originally Posted by McCaber

Agan's, in contrast, feel like an opportunistic move to try and provoke something that the rest of the village could leap on.

This is what I would think is exactly what happened, but that could be the case whether Agan is a Wolf or innocent. So here, not really much to base strong judgement on.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Anyway, my brain is literally switching off, so

++A Little Green

And good Night, village.

[Shastanis Althreduin]

Mmmm... Regarding the recent-running Agan vs Lommy spat, I can't say that I really see a 'slip' where Lommy does in Agan's comment. However, I do think that Agan's reaction to Lommy's pointing it out is rather... overt? I'm not sure that's the word I'm looking for there. But it does strike me as almost too much, even going so far as to vote her in what looks to me like pure revenge. Although she couched her vote in reasoning, ironically I think I'd feel better about Agan if she'd simply been like "I'm offended that you think that of me, so I'm voting you".

As it stands, Agan does seem defensive to me. Of course, this is the first WW game we've had in a long while, so it might just be that she doesn't want to be the first lynch? Still, it does stick out to me.

[Nogrod]

I have two candidates to vote: the phantom and Aganzir.


Aganzir felt bad from the very beginning - like Lommy said

Originally Posted by Lommy

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

But what actually made her into my list of suspects was the totally uncalled for "rubbing the right way" with me on her

Originally Posted by Agan

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

- when what I said was mostly against what she had been saying all along, and she kind of keeps her position with the actual substance by saying Shasta made good points against mine. So the whole thing of saying something positive on my contributions seems overstreched and unnecessary - and kind of out of place unless it was meant to just make me feel good about her - and she felt there was a need for me to not think of her as a suspect.


The Phantom then would be really cool Day1 wolf-lynch, something worth an anniversary -game! He's a darn good player and would be a real asset to the village if we knew we could trust him - and that could be done in the dead-thread. And if he's a wolf, well then good riddance!

What made me think of this idea more seriously was his reaction - when he went into defensive mode after I made my half-joking comment of us voting him. So first he made this "hey wolves, kill me, ranger don't protect me" which is futile in any way, but then he went to kind of forcing it:

Originally Posted by tp

And just so you know, I'm operating under the assumption that any Wolf would be desperate to kill me in case I'm in the opposing pack.

One of the two it is then for me toDay.

Of those with votes already I'm kind of understanding what Form is saying (even if I disagree with him in general) and think Macalaure speaks sense - which goes for Lommy too (even if I do wonder her insistence on the spokesperson -idea). I have not enough to say on Legate as yet and Nilp's self vote I'm just disregarding at this point.

Of others (like most of the above) I have little to say - perhaps because I haven't paid that much attention to anyone thus far (which is purely my fault) but I am not going to make a full list of people when it is 3am.

Checking the latest, giving everything a thought and then voting...

[McCaber]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

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:

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

This also stood out as a weird reaction to me. A strange thing to say and a strange way to take what was said.

In the Agan/Lommy exchanges, I felt that for all I dislike Lommy's reactions (in that they're not what I would do in that situation and to me at least seem counterproductive), it feels more genuine, like how an innocent would respond. Agan's, in contrast, feel like an opportunistic move to try and provoke something that the rest of the village could leap on.

[Rikae]

Originally Posted by Shastanis Althreduin

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 ).

That's only going to be a problem, though, if ONLY person Z voted for person Y.
Which either means a very small village (as in, the last day) or that person Y has no chance of getting lynched anyway. Most days the village will be big enough that the dead will have lots of options.

Folks, please stop assuming people are trying to dictate to the dead! It's all the way back in post #34: the idea is that the dead have a choice. That way the dead can both cast a vote and send an additional message.
And as for me, if/when I end up on the dead thread, I'd prefer to have as much ability to get information to the living as possible. In fact, I would be rather frustrated with (and suspicious of) anyone who muddles that process. It doesn't matter who decides how the message will be sent. It doesn't require elaborate choosing of spokespeople, just an agreement well before the deadline. The strategy won't make sense if the village gets very small, because the extra vote will carry too much weight in its own right, but early on, it could be very valuable.

It's interesting how many people are arguing that it either can't be done or is somehow oppressive. And by interesting, I mean suspicious.