The Colour Mafia - Sign-Ups

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Yeah, pretty self-explanatory. Having seen how annoying non-participation has been lately, I want to stress that you should only sign up if you know you'll be participating actively. I hate to mention names, but people like Jimbob and Coolness are almost never active, and it ruins a lot of the fun. So please, only sign up if you know you'll be participating actively. Since I don't know exactly when this will start, I'll ask people to confirm their participation once the game is about to begin.

 

Anyway, on with the show! I have tried some new things this time around and experimented a bit. I also think the town has had it too easy recently, so expect things to be a bit more difficult this time around. All in all, I think this game will be interesting.

 

I will need 22 players for this game.

 

1) Cube

2) Eenuh

3) MadDog

4) Ellmeister

5) Sméagol

6) ReZourceman

7) chairdriver

8) Jonnas

9) Paj Meen Ah

10) Zell

11) Dyson

12) Diageo

13) The Peeps

14) dan-likes-trees

15) Rummy

16) Nintendohnut

17) Tellyn

18) heroicjanitor

19) jayseven

20) MoogleViper

21) Mundi

22) Marcamillian

Edited September 19, 2010 by Dannyboy-the-Dane

[Cube]

I should be on the list automatically.

[Eenuh]

I'm in. Though this probably won't start until aaaaages from now. =P

[MadDog]

Ofcourse I'm in.

[Ellmeister]

I thought Jay was next?

 

I'm in.

 

 

We need a rule for people who are inactive. Failure to post during a day phase= warning. Failure to put in pm=warning. Two warnings= Dead/replacment?

 

Unless a pre-mentioned reason is given.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I'm in. Though this probably won't start until aaaaages from now. =P

Probably not. ReZ encouraged me to post the sign-up thread now anyway.

 

I thought Jay was next?

 

I'm in.

 

 

We need a rule for people who are inactive. Failure to post during a day phase= warning. Failure to put in pm=warning. Two warnings= Dead/replacment?

 

Unless a pre-mentioned reason is given.

Oh, Jay is most certainly next.

 

That's actually a good rule. I'll inforce that and put it in the original post.

[Sméagol]

I didn't last as long as Sheik as I did as (?) in the DIY one, which should probably end soon too.

So.. "conscript reporting!".

 

I've thought about dealing with inactives.. Probably too late now for this game, but it could perhaps be useful to give everyone a useful passive ability as well, that helps their side in one way, but on the other hand, also clearly gives them away. A passive ability that comes into play only if the player didn't choose to do his normal ability (or chooses to do nothing). Of course, not as much fun as an active player, but at least they can be of some use, and the other side can dispose of them quickly enough if necessary.

 

Edit:

I hope you can get 22 people though.. The 2 games I've been in, didn't get more than 20, and that's inlcuding inactives.. Perhaps you should take into account you'll have to scrap some roles.

Edited September 12, 2010 by Sméagol

[ReZourceman]

I'm in. However on holiday from 1st October till 15th October. Not sure what my situation is going to be like then.

[chairdriver]

I don't like this warning system. Especially since if a player is inactive, they won't care whether they live or die anyway. Also punishes mafia players who are being silent tactically.

 

I'll play BTW.

[Jonnas]

I'm also in

 

Though I'd make things different. There are 3 types of inactives: those who don't post, but send PMs; those who post, but don't send PMs; and those who do neither.

 

The latter kind is the only one who should be killed off on the second strike.

The second kind is fine, just warn them once, then assume they never use their power.

The first kind is the trickiest. Death is a fitting end, but I'd rather motivate them to post. I suggest making them as suspicious as possible in the write-up.

 

Anyway, replace "Death" with "replacement" since that's usually a better option.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I've already written the roles, so the passive power idea won't be implemented this time around, but a nice suggestion.

 

I've planned the game with 22 roles in mind. I can probably alter it, but it'd be nice to get exactly 22.

 

I don't know when this'll begin, so you're signed up for now, ReZ. I'll ask for confirmation once it's about to begin.

 

Regarding inactivity, the warning system may be overkill. All I really ask of people is to acknowledge if they're being inactive. Far too often have people signed up enthusiastically, only to never look at the game thread. What's up with that?

 

So yeah, I may/may not implement the warning system. I'll see how things work out.

Edited September 12, 2010 by Dannyboy-the-Dane

[Ellmeister]

I didn't expect it to be as blunt as what I said. I was expecting a more refined method would be put in place, I was simply stating a possible basic method to think about.

[Paj!]

I'd just do it like I did in X-Men (since I am me, I'd do that. Shut upyeah), if someone is neither PM'ing, or posting in the thread/responding to a single hail by PM, they're modkilled. Simple as. Don't do warnings, as Chair said, there is tactical silence and stuff.

 

P.s I'll sign up.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I'll figure out how I'll handle inactives should the problem arise.

[chairdriver]

Just say "if you don't participate, you don't win (even if you survive to the end), and everyone will hate you".

[Zell]

I'm definately in.

 

What about people who are being silent tactically, but have no PM to send at night? Rather than implement a rigid system, perhaps it's just better to just use one's own judgement.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I'm definately in.

 

What about people who are being silent tactically, but have no PM to send at night? Rather than implement a rigid system, perhaps it's just better to just use one's own judgement.

I agree. I think it's easy to judge who's being tactical, who simply missed a day or two, and who's actually being inactive.

[chairdriver]

Two major reasons people don't participate:

 

1) They're not having fun. Most probable reasons being:

a) They don't like the setup of the game or their role.

b) They're intimidated or don't know how to play or feel like they can't post in the game thread.

2) They're not there to participate. Have no access to internet.

 

 

Having a rigid rule like that I think puts people off who are in category 1)b). It's generally a silly idea. Much better would be to screen people at sign-ups and reject any past offenders.

[Dyson]

I'm in like a bin.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Halfway there!

[Diageo]

I'm definitely in.

[The Peeps]

Sign me up, Danny

[dan-likes-trees]

I want in also thx xxxxxxxxxx

[Rummy]

Love the concept/idea, so I'm a pretty certain/potential signup, but it totally depends on when it is, really.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I'll put you down as a player. When the time comes, I'll ask players for confirmation.