Warrigal wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Pavitra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Friday 28 November 2008 09:52:09 pm Ed Murphy wrote:
>>> Wooble is lynched. (E was a villager.)
>> Whoops.
>>
>> I transfer all my Coins to ehird (I think this is ^354) as an obvious
>> bribe not to
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:16 PM, Pavitra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 28 November 2008 09:52:09 pm Ed Murphy wrote:
>> Wooble is lynched. (E was a villager.)
>
> Whoops.
>
> I transfer all my Coins to ehird (I think this is ^354) as an obvious
> bribe not to kill me tonight.
I sho
On Friday 28 November 2008 09:11:04 pm Geoffrey Spear wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Pavitra
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What's going on with this? Are we stalled again?
>
> Yes. 2 of you are foolishly voting with the werewolf to lynch me
> instead of ehird, who was granted power o
Pavitra wrote:
> What's going on with this? Are we stalled again?
We've been sitting at this status for about a week:
rootis voting for ehird
Wooble is voting for ehird
ais523 is voting for Wooble
ehird is voting for Wooble
Pavitra is voting for Wooble
comex is not voting for anyone
3
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 10:03 PM, Pavitra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's going on with this? Are we stalled again?
Yes. 2 of you are foolishly voting with the werewolf to lynch me
instead of ehird, who was granted power of attorney by the one known
werewolf, which is stalling things.
What's going on with this? Are we stalled again?
Pavitra
ais523 wrote:
> What's happening to the Werewolves contract at the moment? As far as I
> can tell, there's no current session, but there ought to be.
I need to clean up the cross-nomic-game-with-B language, I'll probably
get to it tonight (I was waiting for B to get out of emergency but that
happ
What's happening to the Werewolves contract at the moment? As far as I
can tell, there's no current session, but there ought to be.
--
ais523
Got 3 out of 5 votes, still waiting on 2 more.
On Jul 15, 2008, at 12:49 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Instead of penalties, I suggest deciding the omitted votes at random
after the voting period ends. That'll at least make people's laziness
interesting.
I'm not fond of thi
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Instead of penalties, I suggest deciding the omitted votes at random
>> after the voting period ends. That'll at least make people's laziness
>> inte
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't hear that, but OK.
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See above. I implemented the contest based on the local F2F games,
> where everyone votes simultaneously on the count o
2008/7/15 Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Murphy has already said that e will change it for the next game, so at
> this point you're just whining needlessly.
>
> -root
>
I didn't hear that, but OK.
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Elliott Hird
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And PUBLIC VOTING, this game sucks. It misses the point entirely.
Murphy has already said that e will change it for the next game, so at
this point you're just whining needlessly.
-root
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Charles Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Instead of penalties, I suggest deciding the omitted votes at random
> after the voting period ends. That'll at least make people's laziness
> interesting.
I'm not fond of this idea. Due to the imbalance of information, v
tusho wrote:
> 2008/7/15 Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I still need 3 more votes on whether to lynch Pavitra.
>> I recommend amending the contract to require votes to be cast as soon
>> as possible, with severe pena
On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I still need 3 more votes on whether to lynch Pavitra.
>
> I recommend amending the contract to require votes to be cast as soon
> as possible, with
2008/7/15 Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I still need 3 more votes on whether to lynch Pavitra.
>
> I recommend amending the contract to require votes to be cast as soon
> as possible, with severe penalties for not doin
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I still need 3 more votes on whether to lynch Pavitra.
I recommend amending the contract to require votes to be cast as soon
as possible, with severe penalties for not doing so. A 2-week voting
period is a bit ridiculous.
On Monday 14 July 2008 08:41:47 pm Ed Murphy wrote:
> I still need 3 more votes on whether to lynch Pavitra.
May I suggest "no". (I posted what I think are fairly reasonable
arguments why to do so some time back.)
I still need 3 more votes on whether to lynch Pavitra.
Please don't kill me.
Whether you lynch me or not, any one false lynching from this point
would immediately cede the game to the werewolves. If we have a
lynching this evening, then it's our last chance to catch a wolf; if
we don't, then tomorrow evening is. Seen this way, the rational thing
to do
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As for reasons, what information about the other players could we
> possibly have this early?
Er, well, the werewolves already have nearly perfect information.
-root
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 7:36 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would not be surprised if I
> wound up dead tomorrow, if Wooble doesn't get lynched.
Well, assuming you and ehird aren't both werewolves, killing one of
you to make people suspect I was getting revenge would be the logical
move.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Benjamin Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I agree with Wobble, comex was just trying to save eir ass.
>
> Where I played my one game and have watched others, we call this an "Oh My
> Gosh You Suck" lynch vote, and it is generally treated as not being a Good
> T
On Jun 17, 2008, at 4:12 PM, Quazie wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Geoffrey Spear
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Alexander Smith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unfortunately, all the players here could have an innocent reason
or a guilty reason for what the
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Geoffrey Spear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Unfortunately, all the players here could have an innocent reason
>> or a guilty reason for what they did, although comex jumping in and
>> cl
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Alexander Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unfortunately, all the players here could have an innocent reason
> or a guilty reason for what they did, although comex jumping in and
> closing off the nomination period like that is kind-of suspicious.
Not that I want
So, Wooble nominated comex, then ehird nominated Wooble and comex
seconded. That isn't a lot to go on, but there's some information
there, at least.
Seconding that quickly is rare in real-life games of Mafia, I
find. Nominating immediately on no evidence is surprisingly common,
either to glean inf
29 matches
Mail list logo
