Harb wrote:
Okay, so it's the lack of transparency that you're concerned about. Good. Keep that in mind. How does Zzzzip's plan eliminate transparency? How does everyone committing to ensuring a lynch result based on in thread votes by dogpiling the leader eliminate responsibility for those in thread blue votes? I said that it did, and I was wrong to phrase it that way. I had a specific criticism, but I don't think you're following up on that criticism really.
I was only answering your question. The plan doesn't completely rid us of transparency and that wasn't the issue I had with the plan. The plan tells people to not use their tools to lynch mafia by forcing their power to be diminished. That is the issue, the issue isn't that they aren't or are responsible, the issue is that their ability to hunt mafia becomes limited when their most valuable resource is cut in half or one third. That's of course not to say that all town are small or medium, but you essentially shut down the ability for reasonable town members to have more power against the mafia with this plan. That's the issue. Nothing more or less. A pro - town plan decreases mafia's power while increasing the town's. A neutral one basically equalizes it out. This one negatively affects the town more than it does mafia. That is what I call a bad plan.