Upcoming confessional event - opt out here

[Judge Sam]

For an upcoming event I *may* use one thread in your confessional as part of the game. I take the privacy of your confessional very, very, very seriously. In the past 10 games I've hosted over the last 4 years I have kept every single sentence of information you wrote in confidence until the game was over, except in once case. In Survivor 3 part 2 of 4 in the final five immunity challenge at the end involved doing it in 3 eliminated player's confessionals. Those people were eliminated early in the game and none of them were on a tribe with any of the players in the game at any point. Also that challenge was timed and the players were locked out once they were done so they had no time to read much.


Anyway, I was thinking of showing one thread of your confessional to one person. If you do not want one thread of your confessional to be shown for a short time to one person in the game, please opt out by posting here. I'm 100% fine with it. Thanks!

[Martha]

I'm going to opt out on principle. I don't think eliminated players should have anything to do with the ones still in the game, especially after the "Priest" resurrection thing.

[Sherri]

candy said:

So there is a way to find out.

My fatemaking choice this round is between Damon and Leon. If I choose either they get to see 3 eliminated citizens confessionals for any episode they request.

So I could ask Damon or Leon to look at Adelaide's confessional for an episode and I'm thinking episode 6 is a good choice because episode 7 was the trial and she didn't get a dream when she was imprisoned in episode 8.

Problem is, if I'm imprisoned or if the person I choose is imprisoned, we get 0 information. Also if I choose a spy we get 0 information.

Candy is telling the truth... I wonder how the Imprisonment will go...? Will Singe really protect somebody?

And if Singe is (truly) still undecided about his (real) role, I expect the final Spy to be lurking in AIM or to be online in the forums to get the vibe on who will be Imprisoned to know who Singe will be protecting.

Else, I think Singe could've been faking the role. From what I see, if Singe is really a Spy, Damon/Summer will be Imprisoned so that he has the perfect excuse that "the spy chose to go the safer route" based on his Imprisonment thread.

Then next Imprisonment will be Candy, and Singe will be saying "OMFGLOLOLOL My powers are... iffy~~~!!! LOLZ"

As long as Candy is fooled, there is no need to Imprison her.

[Adelaide]

Should I opt out?

[Adelaide]

because of Candy believing my role? Sam opt me out if someone here reccomends it because my timezone differences mean i wont be able to see any replies to this message

[Sherri]

I think Gordy told her it was fake... So the Mr. Spy will be caught if he/she fabricates any of your confessionals saying you had Dream X.

Don't opt out Addy unless you have something private in there (like girl-girl action with Bev...)

[Adelaide]

kay I WONT opt out! WOOOO! hope someone lies!

[Martha]

sherri said:

I think Gordy told her it was fake... So the Mr. Spy will be caught if he/she fabricates any of your confessionals saying you had Dream X.

Don't opt out Addy unless you have something private in there (like girl-girl action with Bev...)

My opinion is everyone should opt out. This isn't the same as the memory wall. In fact, I think everyone should put a big green tick by the following petition:


1) SAM MUST PROMISE NEVER TO ALLOW ELIMINATED PLAYERS TO INFLUENCE THE CURRENT GAME EVENTS, THEREBY SPOILING A HUGE AMOUNT OF POTENTIAL SPY STRATEGIES AND POSSIBLY RUINING THE WHOLE GAME FOR THE SPIES.

2) SAM MUST TELL THE CITIZENS EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WHEN THEY START LOOKING AND NOT PISS THEM OFF BY REVEALING A TWIST THAT BASICALLY MAKES A MOCKERY OF EVERYTHING THEY'VE DONE IN THE FIRST TWO ROUNDS.

3) SAM MUST ADJUST THE ACCUSATION SYSTEM SO PEOPLE ARE ONLY PENALIZED FOR DELIBERATELY REVEALING THEIR IDENTITIES, THEREBY NOT PENALIZING SPIES ALUMNI.


If it's not obvious enough, I feel very strongly about this. These twists are ruining the game. There are certain core rules that should be adhered to.

Firstly, if you're out, you're out. You can come to exiles but you shouldn't be able to say anything. You can have a Loser's Lounge to comment in but the players still in the game shouldn't see your comments until afterwards. The spies should be able to get a citizen to lie for them and then imprison or exile that citizen before he or she has a chance to realise his mistake. That happened in Spies 2 a couple of times (specifically Tyson with Tiffany and Davoni, although there were others who Tyson wanted out because they might incriminate him). If Tyson had done it now, those two could easily have compared notes and realised who the real spy was. And then someone could've told the people still in the game and Tyson would've been out. Sorry, but that isn't even remotely fair.

Secondly, it's not fair on the citizens for them to be looking for three spies when they should be looking for one (Spies 2), for three spies when they should be looking for first two and then five (Spies 3), or for five spies when they should be looking for a group of four and a group of three (Spies 4). We all signed on to play a game. To suddenly have the premise of that game change midway through (and don't come back at me with "you're still hunting spies", it's not remotely the same thing to be looking for one spy instead of connections between three) is screwing over everybody.

Sam, you know how good a host I think you are - otherwise I wouldn't be writing this, I'd be off putting all my attention into someone else's game instead. I can't imagine how much effort and time you put into these games, which is why I want them to turn out well. And for the most part, they do. But IMO the "Priest" shouldn't have existed, and allowing someone with all the combined information from the Loser's Lounge to go back into the game was quite simply sabotaging your own game. Even with seven spies, the role could have been game-destroying. And speaking of which...

I don't know why Faizah was exiled exactly. I suspect that there was enough suspicion against her without Gordy's intervention. HOWEVER, I told the Loser's Lounge that Faizah had altered my last convo with her. As far as I was aware, only the Priest would ever know about this for certain. But Gordy went back as a confirmed citizen and he could've told everyone or posted it in the Burg. That means that I might have innocently given the citizens a bit of decisive information to use against her after I was exiled. In short, you've put me in the position that I've possibly cheated her out of the win. I DESPISE CHEATS. Telling Abrams my identity was one thing, and I wouldn't have done it if it wasn't for the accusation system and the fact that two of my prime suspects (two spies, as it turns out) were online at the time. But I would NEVER screw over someone in the way that I feel Faizah might have been screwed over had the information I provided against her been decisive.

Which brings me onto the third thing... accusations... I've said all I'm going to say about this. But with more and more alumni, Sam, I think you have to do something to make sure that you're not penalizing your most faithful players.

OK, I think that's all.

[Judge Sam]

Thank you for your thoughts David, I appreciate candid and helpful criticism and rarely do people take the time to type up their thoughts and meet those two criteria haha. If I may respond to them...

1) SAM MUST PROMISE NEVER TO ALLOW ELIMINATED PLAYERS TO INFLUENCE THE CURRENT GAME EVENTS, THEREBY SPOILING A HUGE AMOUNT OF POTENTIAL SPY STRATEGIES AND POSSIBLY RUINING THE WHOLE GAME FOR THE SPIES.

I agree with this point strongly. I firmly believe that "inside the game" and "outside the game" must be separated completely (99% of the time, hold on a sec . Many online games blur this line, such as allowing players to post public Final Words after they know they are eliminated.


In Spies 1, 2, and except for a 100 word message on the final days of Spies 3, this was exactly what happened. (if they count, the same goes for 5 out of my 6 survivor games.)


For this game I decided to use the resource of people "out-of-game" as a role. This is the 1,666th post here which is a huge resource. In Spies 1 and 2 I didn't even have a loser's lounge. The out-of-game resource for Spies 4 would come into play with the Priest role. I have observed other mafia games with a similar role.


The Priest role went through many, many permutations. All the changes are way too long to tell that story here, ask me later if anyone cares lol. The "resurrection" ability (which started as a fatemaker question ) also went through tons of changes. I might also note that players with roles are often targeted by Spies. For the Priest to survive 8 episodes is no easy feat. Had the Spies discovered him, they would have been able to prevent the resurrection. Citizen roles give Citizen bonuses - this was one of them.


As for the Fatemaker question revealing one thread, that's a different story. Just like the Priest, this was the first time I've done anything like that so in a way it is an experiment. As with any experimental thing I start slowly and less influential-y. We'll see how this goes. Again I might add that the idea of the Fatemaker surviving to the Final 7 from 29 seems insane so that ability should be powerful.


Also: I would have preferred a resurrection take place without all eliminated players pooling their thoughts in a loser's lounge. I think that would have been more fair and more interesting. However obviously I'm not going to shut down this amazing place for a possible-resurrection, and I didn't think the LL was enough reason to toss out the resurrection experiment entirely. Also note that I did not tell Gordy he would be reentering the game until 15 minutes before Exile, at which point I cut him off from the LL immediately. He had no time to gather data from here.

2) SAM MUST TELL THE CITIZENS EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WHEN THEY START LOOKING AND NOT PISS THEM OFF BY REVEALING A TWIST THAT BASICALLY MAKES A MOCKERY OF EVERYTHING THEY'VE DONE IN THE FIRST TWO ROUNDS.

Are there any games where the host doesn't tell the # of Spies at the beginning? I'm not sure actually. I know there are TONS where they don't reveal spy/citizen at elimination, meaning you don't know how many Spies are out there at any given point.


Some of your examples are highly exaggerated. This ambiguity only lasts 2 episodes however, and I think it is highly unlikely to discover all 5 or 7 spies in 2 episodes even if you knew there were that many. Looking for groups of 2 or 3 sounds like a safe bet at the start of any game, or just looking for individual suspicious behavior, which is usually how the first spies are found anyway. Rarely is a group of 3 spies found as a group, though 2 spies can be found at once through relationships.


2 episodes is not "midway through the game." I suppose that is personal choice on whether you like the twists or not. Maybe after the game is over you should create an unbiased poll where you ask everyone if they thought revealing the 2 spy groups after exile 2 was terrible or acceptable.

3) SAM MUST ADJUST THE ACCUSATION SYSTEM SO PEOPLE ARE ONLY PENALIZED FOR DELIBERATELY REVEALING THEIR IDENTITIES, THEREBY NOT PENALIZING SPIES ALUMNI.

I am constantly updating penalties to try and be the most accurate, however no system will ever be 100% accurate. I welcome all suggestions.

[Martha]

Wow, that's a detailed post, thanks. Here's my reply to some of your points:

I agree with this point strongly. I firmly believe that "inside the game" and "outside the game" must be separated completely (99% of the time, hold on a sec . Many online games blur this line, such as allowing players to post public Final Words after they know they are eliminated.

I wasn't a huge fan of the Loser's Letter in Spies 3 either, and I can see why the spies kicked their heels about it. But given the events in Spies 3 and Spies 4, I honestly think you need to be blunt about not allowing the eliminated players to interfere in the game, ever, in Spies 5. Think of all those faked convos Tyson posted, that nobody ever questioned. Would he have been able to get away with that if the eliminated cits could have a voice? You're taking a HUGE amount of options away from the spies.

For this game I decided to use the resource of people "out-of-game" as a role. This is the 1,666th post here which is a huge resource. In Spies 1 and 2 I didn't even have a loser's lounge. The out-of-game resource for Spies 4 would come into play with the Priest role. I have observed other mafia games with a similar role.

Again, fine as it stands, but I keep going back to the example of Faizah - I can't believe she would have altered the convo she had with me in any way if she believed for one second that I would be able to call her out on it from beyond the grave. The fact that in the end I don't think Gordy made very much of it, if anything, when he returned, doesn't alter that.

As for the Fatemaker question revealing one thread, that's a different story. Just like the Priest, this was the first time I've done anything like that so in a way it is an experiment. As with any experimental thing I start slowly and less influential-y. We'll see how this goes. Again I might add that the idea of the Fatemaker surviving to the Final 7 from 29 seems insane so that ability should be powerful.

I would be far less concerned about this - after all, you can vet the eliminated players' confessionals yourself - if it wasn't for the fact that I felt you'd crossed a line with the "resurrection".

Also: I would have preferred a resurrection take place without all eliminated players pooling their thoughts in a loser's lounge. I think that would have been more fair and more interesting. However obviously I'm not going to shut down this amazing place for a possible-resurrection, and I didn't think the LL was enough reason to toss out the resurrection experiment entirely. Also note that I did not tell Gordy he would be reentering the game until 15 minutes before Exile, at which point I cut him off from the LL immediately. He had no time to gather data from here.

Fair point, although I'm not sure it alters mine.

Are there any games where the host doesn't tell the # of Spies at the beginning? I'm not sure actually. I know there are TONS where they don't reveal spy/citizen at elimination, meaning you don't know how many Spies are out there at any given point.

No cardflip is completely different. The citizens still know what they're looking for, they just don't know if they've found it or not. And again, the ground rules are set as to exactly what the cits are looking for when the game begins. And three episodes in IS "midway through" for a lot of people. Only half the people in the game survive until episode five in a standard game, remember.

Some of your examples are highly exaggerated. This ambiguity only lasts 2 episodes however, and I think it is highly unlikely to discover all 5 or 7 spies in 2 episodes even if you knew there were that many. Looking for groups of 2 or 3 sounds like a safe bet at the start of any game, or just looking for individual suspicious behavior, which is usually how the first spies are found anyway. Rarely is a group of 3 spies found as a group, though 2 spies can be found at once through relationships.

I'll answer this by quoting Anneliese as exactly as I can recall: "NO WAY did I do all that work just to start again". You've seen how I, and many others, go into the question of who's working with who to a HUGE degree of detail. To do that, you really need to know the number of spies in each group.

2 episodes is not "midway through the game." I suppose that is personal choice on whether you like the twists or not. Maybe after the game is over you should create an unbiased poll where you ask everyone if they thought revealing the 2 spy groups after exile 2 was terrible or acceptable.

Will do.

I am constantly updating penalties to try and be the most accurate, however no system will ever be 100% accurate. I welcome all suggestions.

Ha, you have them in a previous thread. My essential point is that a player can be given a bonus of some kind for "proving" that another player has deliberately revealed his or her identity, and that player then receives a whole host of penalties (I quite liked the one you gave to Zander and Kip.) That way you give players a huge incentive not to reveal their own identities. It seems to have the fewest drawbacks to me.


Again, thanks for taking the time to reply so fully.

[Candy]

"Secondly, it's not fair on the citizens for them to be looking for three spies when they should be looking for one (Spies 2), for three spies when they should be looking for first two and then five (Spies 3), or for five spies when they should be looking for a group of four and a group of three (Spies 4). We all signed on to play a game. To suddenly have the premise of that game change midway through (and don't come back at me with "you're still hunting spies", it's not remotely the same thing to be looking for one spy instead of connections between three) is screwing over everybody."


I really agree with this point actually. The twists are fun but they do screw over everybody.

[Martha]

Opinions on the following please? Justified? Unjustified? Too much player meddling? Right or plain wrong?

1) SAM MUST PROMISE NEVER TO ALLOW ELIMINATED PLAYERS TO INFLUENCE THE CURRENT GAME EVENTS, THEREBY SPOILING A HUGE AMOUNT OF POTENTIAL SPY STRATEGIES AND POSSIBLY RUINING THE WHOLE GAME FOR THE SPIES.

2) SAM MUST TELL THE CITIZENS HOW MANY SPIES THEY'RE LOOKING FOR WHEN THEY START LOOKING AND NOT PISS THEM OFF BY REVEALING A TWIST THAT BASICALLY MAKES A MOCKERY OF EVERYTHING THEY'VE DONE IN THE FIRST TWO ROUNDS.

3) SAM MUST ADJUST THE ACCUSATION SYSTEM SO PEOPLE ARE ONLY PENALIZED FOR DELIBERATELY REVEALING THEIR IDENTITIES, THEREBY NOT PENALIZING SPIES ALUMNI.

[Jeremiah]

I agree about number 3, but 1 and 2 are just vast overreactions. I mean sure, it's nice knowing how many spies there are, but a mockery of everything they've done? That's a touch far.

[Kip]

The only thing I can say in Sam's defense about the number of Spies in his games, he never once told players to look for three Spies, or any number. In Spies Two, everyone assumed it was three at the start, and so on in the other games. If Sam came out and said there were four Spies, but went back a week later to say he mislead us, is one thing. Never assume anything in these games. Everyone who has ever played a Sam game should know that. David, you of all people should know this as well. You saw it happen in Spies Two and Three, why automatically assume Sam picked five Spies in this one?

[Martha]

Good points. I'm deliberately not going to reply to them because I want as many unbiased opinions on this one as possible. I've put my thoughts above, let's see what others think.

[Kate (Damon)]

I agree with 1/3 but not with 2.