Even if you can’t “unring the bell”, I think people will try to play fair.

Sorry if I grossed you out, Kevan.

This proposal conflicts with the Spiritualist’s special power.

Quote: “Spiritualist. The Spiritualist has the astonishing facility to speak with the dead. If the Spiritualist is in a room with a dead Guest and the lights are out, the Spiritualist may, once every 96 hours, notify the Executor that the Spiritualist is conducting a seance, whereupon: (1) the Executor shall privately notify the dead Guest that the Spiritualist is trying to contact him from beyond the veil, and requesting that the dead Guest deliver a message to notify the Executor what information, if any, the dead Guest chooses to deliver to the Spiritualist. The Executor may, in his discretion, provide to the dead Guest true or false information regarding the circumstances of the dead Guest’s death, which the dead Guest may incorporate or omit from the dead Guest’s reply to the Spiritualist, as he chooses, (2) the Executor shall, promptly after receiving from the dead Guest’s message to the Spiritualist, privately communicate the same to the Spiritualist. “

I would lose my job. But I dont think you want to include such questions? Nice idea, but need   for me.

I should read comments, before writing a new one. spikebrennan has mentioned that point…

Mabye we should think about another special power for the Spiritualist? As I have no idea, whats about you?

My suggestion would be to pass the proposal, but amend it to make it clear that the Spiritualist’s special power overrides it.

Just add the Spiritualist to the end of this rule.

“These restrictions do not apply to communication among the group of Dead Guests and Arrested Guests, to any information contained in the current state of the GNDT, and do not restrict the Spiritualist from the normal use of his supernatural and unholy ability.”

I think the Spiritualist power had been written under the assumption that a “dead players can’t talk” rule existed - posting one question via the Executor every 96 hours compares poorly to “log into IRC and chat to the dead player” or “email dead player asking them to post all their notes in a blog entry”. (The Spiritualist can hardly “lose their job” when every single player, including the Spiritualist, can talk directly to the dead as much as they like.) It does need a tweak to work here, though.

Any particular reasons for the against votes? Is keeping players in the loop more important than theme? Does knowledge-dying-with-you mark out the sharp-eyed players as obvious murder targets?

with Keba’s patch.

change to - my fix seems to pass :)

A clarification of my vote: I dislike saying, as a rule, that people may not do something irrevocable like transmit information. Changes in gamestate can be rolled back; who you told about the person who killed you can’t. And, of course, no penalty for this is mentioned. It ends up being little more than a recommendation—a recommendation with the nominal force of the ruleset behind it, but one without any penalties for violation or provisions for undoing the damage caused by such. As such, I think it’s pretty pointless.

It’s mostly a recommendation, but it does give the players a clear context for how to respond to a DoV of “so, I’ve been chatting to the dead guys on IRC, and reading their notes, and we worked out that Player X killed all of them”, and makes it clear that “damn, you got me, I don’t care any more, Player Y is the other murderer, check out our voting collusion” is an unfair revelation that we should try to recover fairly from, rather than being okay.