We've a number of ways we've done things like this in the past, my own personal favorite is to winnow out the players who don't belong on the list and have the remainder fight it out, like 'the five lowest posters, full posts count as 2, NM as 1" etc. The problem with that is you need to make reasonable exceptions for RBIRL players and newer players.

We've used other means in the past to create that small pool, we've never needed to throw a dice either, but it does ensure we focus our attention. We could argue that the players who have been seen to contribute the least to acquiring information could be selected and required to roleclaim, and we review those normally and typically one will be suspicious, but if not we can always try something else.

To do something like that we need 2 things, 1) A pool size we're aiming to create and 2) Criteria for getting that pool. With 12 players we want to 3-5 I'd say.

Now as to #2 we're essentially talking about "Anti-town by not being pro-town enough" and that's got some fairly default criteria we tend to use. Number of posts, number of Non-NM posts, questions asked, etc. I'd like us to come up with some others if we can, but here's how that stands:

Post Count:
Isaac - 17
Fox and Ravens - 13
Hobo - 10
Artsapat - 9
Praziquantel - 8
Fanatic-Templar - 7
ranagrande - 6
Yunalesca - 6
Taiga - 5
Beet - 4
Dannymac - 3
Sacrilicious Toast - 2

That's 90 posts for an average of 7.5, sadly 45 of those 90 are NM posts, exactly half, but nobody's really been disproportionate about it. Also, if it comes down to 'tie-breakers' RBIRL posts, side post like me and rana BSing about game 15, etc aren't exactly 'participation', though they are to a limited degree. Same, the lowest players on that list our our 2 newest players, with the newest lowest. That's not a black mark on them though, they are new, don't know what to ask or what they might say to screw their team. So our bottom 5 not including them seem more valid, I'll leave it to them to discuss NM, RBIRL, or side-posts as value.

We've also got questions asked, but that's a short list, me at 3 and Rana just asked 1, "Did your RM describe your appearance?"

Attacks and defenses are major participation too, but we haven't had much that really counts. We've only had 3 votes, and none really levied evidence or merited a defense. We can add in less overt attacks, and defenses given for others, but I'd leave that for individuals to point out.

Vote: Isaac - Dannymac - 03 Aug 2013 01:09:47 AM
Vote: Sacrilicious Toast - Fox and Ravens - 30 Jul 2013 08:56:04 AM
Vote: Hobo - ranagrande - 29 Jul 2013 10:43:15 PM

On normal votes I'd bring up how skillfully and actively people involved attacked or defended on those votes, voter, target, or neither, but it just doesn't apply.

I'd like to have more criteria, as things stand we'd end up using the following: everyone who spoke less than average, or 7 posts or less;

Fanatic-Templar - 7
ranagrande - 6
Yunalesca - 6
Taiga - 5
Beet - 4
Dannymac - 3
Sacrilicious Toast - 2

Then we'd strike the bottom 2, because they're new and if removed early game it will be modkill, and especially with Berg set on 12 so firmly we'd want to give him a chance to come up with a sub, a different player or a qualified sub from the current players who gets axed on day/night 1.

Fanatic-Templar - 7
ranagrande - 6
Yunalesca - 6
Taiga - 5
Beet - 4

That's the list I'd work off right now as a base, I follow up shortly with my specific thoughts on each, but again I'd like some more criteria too.