Akonyl wrote:No! Bad Kleene! D:
T_T
Well, lethargy is still punishing people for being active again
Whether you intend it to be so or not doesn't matter 
People that come active again will feel being punished for being active again.
If becoming active again is hurting them, they could just stay inactive. At least that's what they'll think :p
And I thought you wanted to teach the thief to "stop stealing". Not to teach him to continue stealing ;p
Also, you punish him by not letting him join the next round. The shopkeeper wouldn't use a punishment for the thief that would harm himself too.
@vote for themself:
Your lethargy was supposed to stop ties too, at least I thought it did :p
That's what the "will vote for themselves" idea is about too. Not to punish inactive ones (at not directly, since you can lynch inactives ones easier)
Id did penalize, or would have, in case holmes wouldn't have been aptxed anyway.
Or do you want to say that every inactive-but-got-active-again player would get aptxed immediately the day he want's to vote again? You yourself don't like to make decisions based on 1 occurrence :p



Those people shouldn't even be playing in the first place if they don't care enough to send in actions for X amount of phases.

