LXXVIII: Politicus Lupus (GAME OVER!! SEE POST #2593 FOR RESULTS)

[oliegirl]

Good morning everyone.

Pass sent an email to let CR and I know that he is having trouble accessing FOFC from his work computer, I told him I'd post something here so you guys would know what's going on.

Also, a couple of you have PM'd with questions - I'm sending those to CR right now and will PM you individually when I get answers.

[st.cronin]

Ok I am caught up now. I haven't really thought much about the rules and whatnot, but my first instinct is that the Democrats took a hit with the veto.

I have not consulted my fellow Elephants, but I think we are not in a hurry to press our advantage (whatever that might be). I am interested in rooting out the wolves first and foremost.

[mccollins]

Hey clap - how far are you behind in your polls for voting on our super liberal bill?

Everyone don't forget to get re-elected...

[claphamsa]

im not at all behind

KTHXBAI

[chesapeake]

Since no one has proposed a veto override, I don't know that voting is necessary. If someone wants to propose it so that we can all vote against it -- knowing what the outcome will be -- we can be just like the real Congress

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

Since no one has proposed a veto override, I don't know that voting is necessary. If someone wants to propose it so that we can all vote against it -- knowing what the outcome will be -- we can be just like the real Congress

True, but there's no downside to doing it anyway.

[PackerFanatic]

Originally Posted by chesapeake

Since no one has proposed a veto override, I don't know that voting is necessary. If someone wants to propose it so that we can all vote against it -- knowing what the outcome will be -- we can be just like the real Congress

That is my feeling as well. And I doubt anyone is going to propose, as almost everyone wanted it vetoed in the first place

[jeheinz72]

I figured why not.

[oliegirl]

CR asked me to post the following:

“In the wake of the veto of the WW Security Act, the Justices of the Supreme Court have decided that unlimited veto power may be an abuse of such power, and could unhinge the careful checks and balances system our forefathers first implemented.



As such, every Presidential term now has a limit of two vetos. Every four years, the two veto power will renew, regardless of who is President. There is no cumulative nature to not choosing to use a veto, so if a veto is not used during its Presidential term, it is lost at the end of that term (to be replaced by a new veto power for the new term.”

[oliegirl]

CR also asked me to post the following as GM:

“I have become increasingly concerned that I may have unbalanced the game toward the village by allowing the multiple bills along with the veto function, while limiting the wolves to one rider per day. I felt that allowing the wolves more riders would further unbalance the game in the wrong direction, as well as simply hiding the rider clause until after the bill passed.

So I decided that the above limitation on vetos was the best compromise. I do this solely for game balance purposes, and I apologize in advance for not seeing it coming.

This limitation will begin with the new Presidential term tonight. Please take that into consideration with your decisions today and in the future. Thanks.”

[Tyrith]

So now we should probably pass a BG and two other bills and then probably suck up whatever we get today, although our exact strategy can be discussed further. I'm pro getting more roles into the game as quickly as possible.

[PackerFanatic]

Hmm...well, it makes sense. Changes our strategy for today though, for sure.

[claphamsa]

yeah, good changes for balance. bad changes for killing wolves!

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

yeah, good changes for balance. bad changes for killing wolves!

+1

[st.cronin]

I am not sure I would have supported vetoing the seer bill, although what's done is done. I think in future we accept the riders unless they make the bill clearly pro-wolf.

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I am not sure I would have supported vetoing the seer bill, although what's done is done. I think in future we accept the riders unless they make the bill clearly pro-wolf.

It was the BG bill that got vetoed.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Tyrith

It was the BG bill that got vetoed.

All the more reason not to veto it, then. Seer and cunning is, depending on numbers of wolves, essentially an even trade. Bodyguard and cunning is not. The presence of a bodyguard helps the village more than the presence of a cunning wolf hurts the village.

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

All the more reason not to veto it, then. Seer and cunning is, depending on numbers of wolves, essentially an even trade. Bodyguard and cunning is not. The presence of a bodyguard helps the village more than the presence of a cunning wolf hurts the village.

The argument was whether the presence of a cunning wolf was worth a one day delay in getting a bodyguard (under the assumption that another BG bill will be passed today).

[st.cronin]

Well, I disagree. The wolves obviously fear the bodyguard the most.

[chesapeake]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

Well, I disagree. The wolves obviously fear the bodyguard the most.

The wolves obviously did fear the BG the most.

Under the rules that were in place at the time, the village could have gotten 2 roles every day for the rest of the game and shut out the wolves entirely. That seemed like a pretty good deal to everyone. And putting off the BG role one day still doesn't seem like an enormous problem.

As it is, we can consider a plan whereby the village gets 2 roles every 2 years -- while still shutting out the wolves.

[mccollins]

I ENDORSE PackerFanatic for President.

(Olie/CR: Do I need to bold that?)

[st.cronin]

I have a question about the roles. There is a bill passed that creates a seer, for example - I assume that CR uses random.org to assign that role to a player. Is that role protected against landing on a wolf? In other words, is it possible for a bill to become counterfeited by the role being given to a wolf player?

[Tyrith]

ENDORSE ILLINIFAN999

[Tyrith]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I have a question about the roles. There is a bill passed that creates a seer, for example - I assume that CR uses random.org to assign that role to a player. Is that role protected against landing on a wolf? In other words, is it possible for a bill to become counterfeited by the role being given to a wolf player?

We wrote that into the bill - no, it will not land on a wolf.

[jeheinz72]

ENDORSE ILLINIFAN999

We think he's just swell.

[claphamsa]

I endorse the repulican fellow from Chicago! (illinifan999)

[st.cronin]

Well if we can write the "brothers" bill that way, that would be a tremendous help to building a cot against the wolves.

[st.cronin]

ENDORSE ILLINIFAN999

[PackerFanatic]

I think any bill that is written should have that clause it in, no matter what.

[mccollins]

Originally Posted by mccollins

I ENDORSE PackerFanatic for President.

(Olie/CR: Do I need to bold that?)

I ENDORSE PackerFanatic for President.

eh, just in case.

[KWhit]

I endorse PackerFanatic for President.

[chesapeake]

I ENDORSE PackerFanatic for President.

[path12]

I ENDORSE PackerFanatic for President.

ooc: bad work issues. not going to be around much for awhile today.

[oliegirl]

To answer Mccollins, all votes/endorsements, etc...must be in bold.

[st.cronin]

So, is the plan today for the Democrats to introduce another bodyguard bill? Or do they have something else in mind?

[mccollins]

Yeah, we'll be working on it. Will most likely be the same thing.

[jeheinz72]

Olie/CR - Is No Lynch allowed.


I'm not necessarily in favor of it, just want the info.

[oliegirl]

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

Olie/CR - Is No Lynch allowed.


I'm not necessarily in favor of it, just want the info.

I'm checking with CR and will get back to you asap

[oliegirl]

From CR:

"Tell ketchup boy it’s allowed—but the public likes no lynch votes about as much as they like vetoed wolf bills. "

[PurdueBrad]

endorse Illinifan for President

[PackerFanatic]

Ketchup boy, haha.

[jeheinz72]

Gotcha, so it looks like No Lynch is, as expected, a bad idea.

[Mrs. Schmidty]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

blly grahm was a fine individul, and a good freind of mine! He bought me my first assault rifle!

That's like saying Mohammad bought you a bible.

[Mrs. Schmidty]

Originally Posted by claphamsa

mr RendeR I invite you to come Quail hunting with me

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by jeheinz72

Gotcha, so it looks like No Lynch is, as expected, a bad idea.

no lynch is AWLASY a bad idea!

[claphamsa]

Originally Posted by Mrs. Schmidty

That's like saying Mohammad bought you a bible.

\

my consistuents are more conisdered with being free from govenrment intervention and keeping their guns than with relgios afairs! that is strickly a state level decisino!

[Mrs. Schmidty]

Illini, like myself, is as straight-laced as they come. He's free from lobbyist influence and is above reproach. I whole-heartedly

ENDORSE ILLINIFAN999 FOR PRESIDENT

[KWhit]

As Leader of the ever strong, slightly less popular Democratic Party, I KWhit submit the following bill for consideration of this Congress.


NATIONAL WOLF SECURITY BILL - REDUX

CONGRESSIONAL SPONSORSHIP: KWhit and path12

WHEREAS, our country is faced with a security threat from within in the guise of the so-called "Wolf Party":

BE IT RESOLVED:
The role of Bodyguard is hereby established. The Bodyguard may protect either him or herself or one other member of Congress from harm once per year. The Bodyguard may guard the same person in consecutive years if deemed necessary. The Bodyguard shall notify Chief Rum of who he or she intends to protect prior to passage of the night deadline.

Should the person under the Bodyguard's protection be attacked by wolves, there is a 33% chance that the attacker is killed by the Bodyguard. Should the attacker survive, there is a 33% chance that the identity of the attacker will become known to the Bodyguard.

The Bodyguard will be chosen randomly by divine providence (aka Chief Rum) from among the living Members of Congress who are not wolf party members.

[KWhit]

VOTE TO PASS NATIONAL WOLF SECURITY BILL - REDUX

[PackerFanatic]

VOTE PASS NATIONAL WOLF SECURITY BILL - REDUX