@MOD: Still waiting on some sort of feedback about what is being done about our no-show.
Zchinque: Also, while neither you or JMich as said so outright, I get the idea that you think I will outright refuse to share my information. I have not said so, and will not do so. I know how mafia works, it's a game of tyranny of majority. If you get the majority to go for the info plan, I will follow along. Until that time, I will continue to argue against it, unless I should be persuaded that it's actually a good idea.
JMich: Love the fact that if you change information with vote, your "argument" takes a lovely light.
Also, while neither you or JMich as said so outright, I get the idea that you think I will outright refuse to vote. I have not said so, and will not do so. I know how mafia works, it's a game of tyranny of majority. If you get the majority to vote for someone, I will follow along. Until that time, I will continue to argue against it, unless I should be persuaded that it's actually a good idea.
JMich: Add to this the fact that you wish to hammer, and I think I should be looking less at the sherry and more towards you. But nah, ignore me, voting and sharing information has nothing in common.
I admit defeat. You have bested me. I simply cannot muster enough care to give this post a reply as snide as it deserves. It may, in fact, be beyond my humble capabilities.
First, I love that you think that you have made some grand reveal, when it should have been painfully clear to anyone that my statement above was similar to how voting works.
That was kind of why I mentioned that Mafia is a fame of tyranny of majority.
Second, the part you quoted above is neither an "argument" or an argument. Next time you attempt condescension, you might want to get the details correct. It makes the impact much greater.
Third, substituting one word for another does not an argument make. It's easy to make something look bad that way, but doesn't make it right. It's a horrible strawman, and you should feel bad for having made it.
Fourth, I note that you have still not given any good reason for why you believe sharing this information is a good idea, despite my asking for this. Are you incapable of providing such reasons?
flubbucket: Two kinds of people.
1) People who talk about doing something.
2) People who do something.
3) People who do nothing, but still seem to be under impression that they do.
Robbeasy: We have been given Likes, Dislikes, and Clues, with a strict rule that we can only discuss them in Day 1. After that , they become pointless.
So?
On balance, I would think a full list of likes / dislikes and clues would only help Town, not hinder them.
Why do you think so? Back up your belief that it will be helpful and a good idea with some reasons why.
I shall now quote something that I sent to none other than our Mod during #17, re: the lynchable mod:
"It wasn't something I had planned to happen, but I wasn't surprised. Once it was clear that the mod was a lynchable, killable entity, I knew it was bound to happen sooner or later. That's also why I wouldn't have made the mod a scum role. I figured it was likely you would all get together and lynch the mod because you /could/, not because it was a smart play. I like try to punish plays that are made only because of "why nots"."
Now, I don't mean to imply that Joe must follow the same beliefs that I do when it comes to game design and game moderation, but the point that "Because we can!"
IS NOT A GOOD REASON stands.
amok: 15. Zchinque - yes if forced to
I find that wording completely silly, and would like to have it changed to a no.
And you too, as you along with Jmich seems to be the most vocal proponents for a claim. Why is it a good idea?
Telika: Also, beyond a list of "for" and "against", I would be more interested (I give up on expecting actual justifications) by a list of individual judgements on who finds what stance "scummy" or "townish". Maybe I'll make the list myself, if no one feels like doing it inbetween. It's a bit of work, as sometimes it depends on subtle choices of words.
I find the stances in themselves to be null-tells.
