Mini 584: Sudo_Nym Presents- Over!

[FaerieLord]

Unvote

. I reread all of 533 now, and Zeek played exactly the same as town. He's just not that good of a player.

Once I finish analyzing 533, I'll reread too.

[Marmalade]

Minor FoS: All those metagaming Zeek for his behaviour in #533 only.

This includes FaerieLord, obviously.

You understand that, even though Zeek may have acted like he did in that game here, and he was town there, that's actually inconclusive? Therefore, you are using an

inconclusive

meta to remove suspicion from Zeek? This feels weird.

The reason, in case people didn't know, that it is inconclusive, is that FaerieLord and others don't seem to have found any games where Zeek was scum to compare. The fact is,

this could be Zeek's playstyle not only as town but as scum as well.

Thus, it could be a null tell. I understand that that doesn't make him scummy, but it is odd to consider someone

innocent

because of those actions. (In comparison to myself, for instance, since I consider Zeek to be more innocent than others because the case against him is pretty crap.)

[FaerieLord]

@Marmalade. Look at it this way. I was voting zeek for the stuff I said before, but he does the stuff I said before as town, so thus it is now a null tell.

I'm not saying he's town, but I'm saying that my case is slightly invalid since he does those things as town.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

What faerielord says. The case on zeek boils down to things he does while town. That doesn't mean he is town, but I have no reason to vote for him, because I have no reason to believe he's scum. So I'm arguing that its a bad case.

[icemanE]

@ Marmalade: This quote:

(In comparison to myself, for instance, since I consider Zeek to be more innocent than others because the case against him is pretty crap.)

Why do you consider Zeek innocent just because there is a bad case against him? That's not a valid reason for believing someone is innocent - just because the reason people suspect him currently is not good does not mean in any way that there are no other reasons to suspect him. Speaking for myself, I no longer think he is overly suspicious, but I think it's a bad idea to dismiss the notion altogether simply because no one has brought the right issues to the forefront. The meta that Faerie and co. have mentioned is a stronger reason, in my opinion, to tone down suspicions.

[CaptainCake]

@TDC post 89: I didn't respond to the post because really there was nothing more to say. He's disagreeing with me because be believes his reason for his vote is valid. I already mentioned that I thought his reasoning was poor and that it was infact still a random vote. Any more posts on that topic would have been rather pointless in my oppinion and there were better topics of conversation to be had. I guess you could say I backed down but I don't see it as such, I made my point and got his view on it. Why would I have to prove that I'm right when it's a moot point?


@FaerieLord

I'm not going to even bother answering CaptianCake's answer. His attack on me is gut, and I really cannot defend my self against gut.

You can't explain why you seem pushy for a roleclaim?

@Iceman

Yeah, more or less. There was no imminent threat whatsoever of a hammer, so there was no need to take my vote off him, and I want my vote to sit on the person I'm most suspicious of. Additionally, while I don't necessarily call for a Zeek lynch any longer, I wouldn't be entirely opposed to it.

Fair enough.

@ Marmalade: This quote:

(In comparison to myself, for instance, since I consider Zeek to be more innocent than others because the case against him is pretty crap.)

Why do you consider Zeek innocent just because there is a bad case against him? That's not a valid reason for believing someone is innocent - just because the reason people suspect him currently is not good does not mean in any way that there are no other reasons to suspect him. Speaking for myself, I no longer think he is overly suspicious, but I think it's a bad idea to dismiss the notion altogether simply because no one has brought the right issues to the forefront. The meta that Faerie and co. have mentioned is a stronger reason, in my opinion, to tone down suspicions.

So wait... we should consider him guilty even though no one has found a good reason to say he is? Your argument is flawed. Just because people suspect him for a stupid reason doesn't mean he isn't scum therefore you should still lynch him? Why don't we just lynch you then? We don't have a valid reason but that doesn't mean there couldn't be one at some point. You can argue back but it doesn't matter becuase I swear we'll find a good reason to lynch you later. I swear you're scum, I just can't find the right issue yet...

Of course I don't think Iceman is scum but he still could be!

Now back to the realm of the sane:
I'm not a big fan of judging Zeek from other games. Play style can change and just because he was town before doesn't mean he's town now. In my oppinion the entire discussion of how he played another game is just trying to derail the town onto a pointless track.

[icemanE]

So wait... we should consider him guilty even though no one has found a good reason to say he is? Your argument is flawed. Just because people suspect him for a stupid reason doesn't mean he isn't scum therefore you should still lynch him? Why don't we just lynch you then? We don't have a valid reason but that doesn't mean there couldn't be one at some point. You can argue back but it doesn't matter becuase I swear we'll find a good reason to lynch you later. I swear you're scum, I just can't find the right issue yet...

Of course I don't think Iceman is scum but he still could be!

A couple posts ago I said I didn't want to lynch him. If you read my post I don't say he's guilty, I just say he's not necessarily innocent, because we don't have proof for that either.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I'm not a big fan of judging Zeek from other games. Play style can change and just because he was town before doesn't mean he's town now. In my oppinion the entire discussion of how he played another game is just trying to derail the town onto a pointless track.

The discussion of how he played another game

succeeded

in derailing the town from the pointless track of lynching zeek for being zeek. Of course he's not confirmed town, but there was no good reason to suspect him of being scum now. If you lynched me for being me every game, you'd be right some of the time, but you'd be wrong more.

[ZeekLTK]

A couple posts ago I said I didn't want to lynch him. If you read my post I don't say he's guilty, I just say he's not necessarily innocent, because we don't have proof for that either.

Yet you still have your vote on me...

no one else finds it odd that ice is constantly saying "I don't think we should lynch [the player I have my vote for]"??

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Actually, iceman's voting for mafiassk.

[FaerieLord]

@Captain cake. I already answered my roleclaim thing.

[TDC]

I understand where you are going with the null-tell thing, although I quite honestly have no idea how a Zeek-scum-tell would look like then, I guess he'd need to do something incredibly stupid. I don't really like such double standards.

I can't say I have much of an idea of whether he's town or scum at this point, but if his "town"-behaviour is anything to go by we'll probably never find out..

Anyway, since my discussion with him is going nowhere and the town consensus seems to be we should just let him be, I might as well

unvote Zeek

.

Cake: Fair enough, I thought you had just missed the question due to your absence.

As for MafiaSSK, I've previously said I appreciate his bandwagon, and I'd like to add this:

It seemed to me, by the way they were acting that TSPN and Zeek were defending each other, sort of like scum would do.

I have no idea where you think Zeek defended TSPN, but I guess the reverse is true.
However, one of your few previous posts was this:

Unvote, vote icemanE

for saying "we're not in the random voting stage anymore but I can't be bothered to scumhunt. [/b]

Don't vote him. He could just be newbie town. My playstyle was exactly like that in my last game.

Now, TSPN's defense of Zeek was based on "I played with him in another game, he was town and played like here". Your defense of iceman is based on "I've played like this as town".
Your defense is less well-founded than his, yet his suggests a link between them in your book.. What should we think about you then?

I do have a question for everyone else regarding MafiaSSK though: Nanosauromo said (in his random vote) that MafiaSSK lurked a lot in their last game.. doesn't that make his lurking a null-tell, because he "always does it"?
In Mini 539 he had 23 posts, was mason and lived until Night 4, that's like five posts per game day..

Again: I'm not saying we should not attack him for his lurking - I for one don't share the null-tell-theory.

Greasy Spot: Your last post contained a correction of the Mod's votecount.. anything else to add?

Could we get a prod/replacement for Nanosauromo?

Also a quick reminder that I'll be gone over the weekend.

[Marmalade]

I understand (and am pleased) with the response of FaerieLord.

Why do you consider Zeek innocent just because there is a bad case against him? That's not a valid reason for believing someone is innocent - just because the reason people suspect him currently is not good does not mean in any way that there are no other reasons to suspect him. Speaking for myself, I no longer think he is overly suspicious, but I think it's a bad idea to dismiss the notion altogether simply because no one has brought the right issues to the forefront. The meta that Faerie and co. have mentioned is a stronger reason, in my opinion, to tone down suspicions.

Yeah, I understand why you may have got that from my post (it was kinda unclear), but what I meant was that there isn't a particularly good case against him, which is why I don't think he is that scummy at the moment.

I need to re-read, since I think there are better targets than Zeek at this point.

[icemanE]

The discussion of how he played another game succeeded in derailing the town from the pointless track of lynching zeek for being zeek. Of course he's not confirmed town, but there was no good reason to suspect him of being scum now. If you lynched me for being me every game, you'd be right some of the time, but you'd be wrong more.

That's a really solid point.

[ZeekLTK]

Actually, iceman's voting for mafiassk.

I shouldn't have checked this thread (and posted in it) so late at night. :p

[Greasy Spot]

I will have very little access till Wednesday April 30th.

[ZeekLTK]

The reason, in case people didn't know, that it is inconclusive, is that FaerieLord and others don't seem to have found any games where Zeek was scum to compare. The fact is,

this could be Zeek's playstyle not only as town but as scum as well.

Thus, it could be a null tell. I understand that that doesn't make him scummy, but it is odd to consider someone

innocent

because of those actions. (In comparison to myself, for instance, since I consider Zeek to be more innocent than others because the case against him is pretty crap.)

Well you are most certainly welcome to read other games I've been in. Just click the "wiki" button under my post...

[ZeekLTK]

unvote; vote MafiaSSK

Partially to put pressure on him (8 posts in almost a month? come on) partially because he's not even trying to help the town win when he does post:

-MafiaSSK hasn't voted since his random vote (for Nano).

-MafiaSSK hasn't really asked questions of anyone (no scum hunting).

-The only content MafiaSSK has provided has been an odd accusation of me and TSPN "defending each other" which others have pointed out was not really the case AND the "don't vote for ice" comment.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Lurking is, I think, a pretty weak scumtell, but it is also highly anti-town. If mafiassk is town, with this level of pressure, he needs to play, or get replaced, or I am willing to lynch him.

Mod: Please prod mafiaSSK.

[FaerieLord]

Lurking is, I think,

a pretty weak scumtell

, but it is also highly anti-town. If mafiassk is town, with this level of pressure, he needs to play, or get replaced, or

I am willing to lynch him

.

What?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Well, you aren't really pressuring lurkers by voting them if you aren't willing to lynch them for it if it comes to that, are you? That's a worst-case scenario, but if he refuses to play, then we need to get rid of him, one way or another. Especially early in the game, when we have the luxury of at least semi-random lynches.

[icemanE]

Well, you aren't really pressuring lurkers by voting them if you aren't willing to lynch them for it if it comes to that, are you? That's a worst-case scenario, but if he refuses to play, then we need to get rid of him, one way or another. Especially early in the game, when we have the luxury of at least semi-random lynches.

I think I agree with that.

[Sudo_Nym]

mafiaSSK 4

-

TheSweatpantsNinja, Johoohno, icemanE, ZeekLTK

ZeekLTK 1-

Nanosauromo

Greasy Spot 1-

Lowell

Lowell 1-

Greasy Spot

FaerieLord 1-

CaptainCake

With 12 alive, 7 votes will lynch.

Mod Note:

MafiaSSK and Nanosauromo are being prodded. Normally I do this quietly, but their lack of response prompts me to do this publicly, in hopes of getting their attention. This is also the last prods I'm giving them; if I see no response, I will start looking for replacements.

[FaerieLord]

@TSPN. I still say we wait for replacements.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I agree.