|
|
Post by Scarfie on Feb 13, 2015 20:09:53 GMT -5
Ummm - my arm is not that hairy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Caro on Feb 13, 2015 20:10:18 GMT -5
You better stay hydrated  |
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Feb 13, 2015 20:10:20 GMT -5
Vote: Jakey-poo
|
|
|
|
Post by Lissa on Feb 13, 2015 20:12:23 GMT -5
Ummm - my arm is not that hairy. |
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Feb 13, 2015 20:14:03 GMT -5
Votecount
Harry votes Rala.
Emily votes Lo.
Rala votes Hermy.
Hermy votes Lo.
Emily votes CM.
Lissa votes Jake.
Awe votes Jake.
Caro votes Hermy.
Harry votes Jake.
Jake- 3
Lo- 2
Hermy- 2
Rala- 1
CM- 1
With 13 alive, 7 to whack.
Rala has been nominated.
|
|
|
|
Post by jake on Feb 13, 2015 20:15:14 GMT -5
An an aside, I was just thinking about how we tend to operate under the proverbial "Napoleonic Code" when voting in mafia games - guilty until proven innocent. I find that so interesting. I guess it works better for our purposes. (I say "proverbial" because whether that is in fact the history of the Napoleonic Code as it factors into French law is in dispute.) I took Sociology class a while ago and I don't remember much. However, one of the things I learned was that we tend to say that we are innocent until proven guilty but in reality, we just tend to think that somebody is guilty/ |
|
|
|
Post by jake on Feb 13, 2015 20:16:48 GMT -5
Please do not call me that. I rather be whacked a thousand times today than you to call me that. |
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Feb 13, 2015 20:17:09 GMT -5
Please do not call me that. I rather be whacked a thousand times today than you to call me that. Good, we've found middle ground. |
|
|
|
Post by jake on Feb 13, 2015 20:19:24 GMT -5
Vote: Harry-poo
Unvote
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Feb 13, 2015 20:20:53 GMT -5
That doesn't bother me! SOZ!
|
|
|
|
Post by jake on Feb 13, 2015 20:22:51 GMT -5
If I get one more vote, then I will vote for myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lissa on Feb 13, 2015 20:23:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Feb 13, 2015 20:24:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by awelle on Feb 13, 2015 20:26:17 GMT -5
This game is interesting from a sociolagical standpoing in that regard, Sam. I hadn't thought much about it.
The urgency to remove the threat of being night killed is definitely used to have very little regard for anybody innocent dying as a result of any measures used to achieve that. And at first I thought it's the relatively low stakes and that you can win while being dead, but it's not just that. Because winning while being dead just means valuing the fate of our micro society as a whole above any individual's life.
I wonder what would happen, if we only whacked people after having met much more restrictive conditions than having the most votes. I don't think I ever even played a game, where majority has to be reached or there would be no whack for that day. And I think that's a possible setup, but I guess it would be possible to play with even higher requirements for somebody being whacked.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skelda on Feb 13, 2015 20:32:59 GMT -5
Awe, on Mafiascum the vast majority of games are like that. But here it resulted in easy Mafia wins with multiple NLes.
I think if we waited for no reasonable doubts the Mafia would usually pick off the entire Town at Night. But it is interesting how worthless individual human lives are in situations like this for sure. The fate of the hive is put over the fate of the bees.
The way people play changes drastically and probably becomes more realistic if you make it that you lose if you are dead. But that is unfair for people killed at Night obviously. But I don't think most people would care much about what happens to their towns after they die in reality. Especially if that town was responsible for their unjust whacking, haha.
|
|
