-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
It's like fire. I don't think that fire should be able to get away as just one syllable, but apparently it's only one. Not sure I buy that, I've definitely heard it pronounced with two.
But how can you have 1.5 syllables?
A syllable is a syllable, you can't say it's only half!
A syllable is a syllable, you can't say it's only half!
I tried and it is physically painful.
Also, I can't imagine saying ism as one syllable. Do you just say is'm? Because that's pretty terrible.
Well, I've read up more thoroughly and I can only say that that was seriously boring. I'll follow MC's lead as it's better than nothing, and
Vote Delta
Vote Delta
.png){kind=avatar}
The 'm' part of 'ism' is a weird deformed syllable, hence the half part of it. As you say, you can't have a half a syllable. Therefore, it ought to be counted as two syllables.
We're counting syllables when we should be counting votes.
So much for making WW great again. Whatever happened to such golden moments as last game when the village lynched the pissing seer?
So much for making WW great again. Whatever happened to such golden moments as last game when the village lynched the pissing seer?
Sub Out
There's no way I can be useful, as this next week I'm too busy to be part of the game. Might as well let you have advance notice, something I did not have the luxury to have before signing up.
There's no way I can be useful, as this next week I'm too busy to be part of the game. Might as well let you have advance notice, something I did not have the luxury to have before signing up.
Won't be on at deadline tomorrow, FYI.
A little bit of activity at the end, but not a whole lot to analyze day 1. I'm inclined to say the following:
1) Gen. Marshall is slightly less likely to be a wolf than the average (active, if failed, attempt at tie prevention). I would also agree Marshall's point about Wagonlitz makes sense as well, and thus put Wagon in the slightly less likely wolf category.
2) npstr is interesting for remaking the tie there at the end. I'm not going to vote him now because a) I don't know his playstyle yet and b) he's new. But a new wolf might be tempted to try and tie two non-packmates early in an attempt to speed up the game/take out non-packmates. Bears a bit of watching.
3) Throwaway voters: myself, Ithvan, Audren, Daird, Comm Cody, Aedan, Health, the Super Pope. Still living non-voters: Ultikana Re, Delta, Rep Bentley, Emperor Ike, al-Aziz. Of the non-voters, Delta, Ike, and Aziz have responded since then; Bentley and Re haven't.
Delta's drawn some attention for a bit of weird early day 2 posting/voting/unvoting. I don't think mc's point about him posting right after deadline is that compelling, as deadline was shifted from 21:00 to 22:00, and he could have been thrown for a loop by the switch. His quick vote and subsequent unvote of Wagon in the face of pressure is a bit more problematic, in my mind. He's new, though, so could be a villager chasing the first pseudo-decent case.
I'm going to
Vote Rep Bentley
In the absence of solid information, a preemptive CAWZ vote. Delta and npstr make some sense as suspects as well, but I'm a little bit leery of bandwagoning to space someone with multiple votes and don't want to push a newbie just yet without knowing his playstyle.
A little bit of activity at the end, but not a whole lot to analyze day 1. I'm inclined to say the following:
1) Gen. Marshall is slightly less likely to be a wolf than the average (active, if failed, attempt at tie prevention). I would also agree Marshall's point about Wagonlitz makes sense as well, and thus put Wagon in the slightly less likely wolf category.
2) npstr is interesting for remaking the tie there at the end. I'm not going to vote him now because a) I don't know his playstyle yet and b) he's new. But a new wolf might be tempted to try and tie two non-packmates early in an attempt to speed up the game/take out non-packmates. Bears a bit of watching.
3) Throwaway voters: myself, Ithvan, Audren, Daird, Comm Cody, Aedan, Health, the Super Pope. Still living non-voters: Ultikana Re, Delta, Rep Bentley, Emperor Ike, al-Aziz. Of the non-voters, Delta, Ike, and Aziz have responded since then; Bentley and Re haven't.
Delta's drawn some attention for a bit of weird early day 2 posting/voting/unvoting. I don't think mc's point about him posting right after deadline is that compelling, as deadline was shifted from 21:00 to 22:00, and he could have been thrown for a loop by the switch. His quick vote and subsequent unvote of Wagon in the face of pressure is a bit more problematic, in my mind. He's new, though, so could be a villager chasing the first pseudo-decent case.
I'm going to
Vote Rep Bentley
In the absence of solid information, a preemptive CAWZ vote. Delta and npstr make some sense as suspects as well, but I'm a little bit leery of bandwagoning to space someone with multiple votes and don't want to push a newbie just yet without knowing his playstyle.
I feel like every game people misuse the term "throwaway votes" and every game I correct them, to no avail. To make it clear-
Throwaway votes are votes that are meaningless towards deciding the field of candidates at the time they are made. Therefore a single vote made on player who previously had no votes, when no other candidate had more than 1 vote against them, is not a throwaway vote. If that vote remains the sole one on the candidate as other candidates ris in votes, it becomes a meaningless vote, but it does not become a throwaway. On the other hand a player making the same vote close to deadline when the main candidate have many votes is a throwaway vote.
Just looking at the final votecount and calling everyone who is the sole person voting another player a throwaway voter is incorrect, lazy, and sometimes comes across as a set-up to begin fabricating a case on the players in question.
To Aedan's point it's pretty hard to argue that anybody here was throwing their vote away.
This isn't particularly relevant to the current conversation, but has it occurred to anyone else that if everyone voted like how aedan does on D1, we'd have no game to analyze? Fortunately, not everyone does, but it would be amusing if they did.
I definitely did make myself suspect as fuck.
My plan wasn't to make that tie in the last minute, some minutes earlier. The graphics programm just needed way longer to get going than I thought, and having that picture in my post seemed most important to me. Although I would love to be treated as an equal without any fledgling bonus, I have to admit that I did not even think about the consequences auf voting a tie in the last minute. Lesson learned (and get faster software
).
My plan wasn't to make that tie in the last minute, some minutes earlier. The graphics programm just needed way longer to get going than I thought, and having that picture in my post seemed most important to me. Although I would love to be treated as an equal without any fledgling bonus, I have to admit that I did not even think about the consequences auf voting a tie in the last minute. Lesson learned (and get faster software
).
Hence why such voting methods tend to be detrimental, or at the very least not helpful. In moderation, it doesn't hurt, but too many of us can't get into doing it.
One might wonder about the deeper implications. A time or two, I have pondered as to whether or not a "school" of first day voting, if framed as an ethical position, would be in accordance with Kant's Categorical Imperative.
Then I remember that this is neither the place for ethics, nor am I Kantian, and a sense of calm returns.
You'll get along well with Delta.
All well and good - except for the fact that early votes can be changed as deadline nears and the need arises to consolidate on candidates. Those who choose not to alter their vote during this consolidating period choose not to participate in this process and thus their vote becomes worthless. In other words, every vote on day 1 that remains a singleton vote is indeed a throwaway vote.
@npstr, yeah, that was a bad beat with your timing, but you get a first-timer pass till day 3 from me. Wagon's defense seems to be lacking as well, but I want to see if anything develops before I vote. Unfortunately, there isn't a lot to go on yet.
As for all the haiku nonsense:
Any moron can
Write haiku. Just stop at the
Seventeenth syllab
In other news, my new job starts tomorrow night. I will move heaven and earth to post daily, but it just might not happen. Thank you for your understanding.
As for all the haiku nonsense:
Any moron can
Write haiku. Just stop at the
Seventeenth syllab
In other news, my new job starts tomorrow night. I will move heaven and earth to post daily, but it just might not happen. Thank you for your understanding.
You assume that everyone who makes a vote then comes into the thread after they make a vote to see if their vote is still important. On day 1 that is a foolish assumption. The day 1 consolidating process is entirely arbitrary and random, so a person's failure to participate beyond their initial vote does not make their contribution a throwaway vote.
Now, I'm yet willing to give Napster the benefit of the doubt, but how many games has Delta played before? Those two are the easy ones that simply pop-out.
Marshall, Wagon and Ike are of suspicion as well, though as the TIE didn't bring much Wagon is more suspicious, to me at least, of the first two. Ike appears a bit after the deadline if I recall correctly.
Sleepy is once again putting much of his effort into RPing, but since he can even get the job done in that condition he is forgiven, for now.
This is what I've mostly got, up to this point.
Marshall, Wagon and Ike are of suspicion as well, though as the TIE didn't bring much Wagon is more suspicious, to me at least, of the first two. Ike appears a bit after the deadline if I recall correctly.
Sleepy is once again putting much of his effort into RPing, but since he can even get the job done in that condition he is forgiven, for now.
This is what I've mostly got, up to this point.
The more maddeningly absurd Wagon's logic is, the more likely he is to be a villager, I've found.
But only in Bigs, because logic somehow.
Unless, of course, X is a wolf.
Wagonlitz is remarkably stubborn about defending the rationality of his behavior. I'd say it's typical.
The problem of course being that your system almost guarantees that your vote will meaningless (throwaway or no) in providing information about you personally. But that's pretty much just rehashing a point that's been made any number of times before.
It gets said every now and then.
I definitely did make myself suspect as fuck.
My plan wasn't to make that tie in the last minute, some minutes earlier. The graphics programm just needed way longer to get going than I thought, and having that picture in my post seemed most important to me. Although I would love to be treated as an equal without any fledgling bonus, I have to admit that I did not even think about the consequences auf voting a tie in the last minute. Lesson learned (and get faster software
Interesting. Not sure that I think a newb wolf's first inclination would be to risk a tie right away. I'll still keep an eye out, but I don't think that's too particularly suspicious.
He quoted my favorite haiku (I have it memorized). Good man.
It's not quite random, though. On those occasions where one of the consolidation targets happens to be a wolf, there will usually be some shift against that player. When you don't take part, you exert no influence on the direction of vote swings, where you might randomly get something right while others are trying to push it in a wrong direction.