Open 53: Near-Vanilla - Game over!

[deadscilent]

Well you know, thats a good enough reason (Eye roll)

[Shanba]

Well you know, thats a good enough reason (Eye roll)

So you saying that you don't want to lynch scum?

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Shrug. Shanba's attack on me is based on me calling for a policy lynch. Of course, I didn't actually do that. I just said I wasn't sure whether or not we should lynch DS, but I wanted to (my exact words were "on principle," which I suppose could be construed as suggesting a policy, but that's not what I intended). "Policy lynch" were jdodge's words, not mine. Take out the word "policy" from that statement and simply answer the question "Do you think lynching DS is a good idea?" Do you truly think that's an inherently scummy question to ask? Since 'policy' was a word jdodge put into my mouth, it seems a little unfair to hold me accountable over it.

[Shanba]

No, that's not it.

I'm not sure what to do about DS. Ignore him? Lynch him? I can't get any kind of an actual read on him, and maybe that's the point. If so, I sort of want to lynch him on principle.

I hate this post. It reads thusly to me:
I want to be told what to do about DS. I will leave myself an out either way depending on how the rest of the town react. I will look like I'm contributing, while in reality my post will say nothing useful."
The policyu lynch thing is only a minor part of why I hate the post. It's so... indecisive.

[Disciple Slayer]

I'm a pretty unreadable player. If you wanna lynch me because I'm unreadable, go ahead.

Just know that it's a stupid-ass reason for a lynch.

[Crub]

I'm a pretty unreadable player. If you wanna lynch me because I'm unreadable, go ahead.

Just know that it's a stupid-ass reason for a lynch.

Playing the idiot just so that you're unreadable is a stupid-ass way to play Either learn to accept that it's going to get you lynched on day 1, or change your playstyle.

[RossWilliam]

Shanba.....I don't like how definate your being, with not that much bearing to be definite on. I think TSN's post is decidedly innocent. While it's a crummy strategy, a scum's major goal during the day time is to throw confusion into the face of the pro-towners. While he is being crappy at it, this is what DS is doing. So TSN is merely pointing out that maybe we should keep an eye on him. I think it's fine. And now what your doing, Shanba, reeks to me of a scum trying to lynch an innocent. You don't wanna lynch DS, because he's way too much the easy way out. You can paint TSN with just enough scumminess to cover your own tail. So, thusly,

vote: Shanba

[Thesp]

Official Vote Count

klebian

: 1 (Phate)

skitzer

: 1 (dramamoose)

RossWilliam

: 1 (TheSweatspantsNinja)

Phate

: 1 (JDodge)

deadscilent

: 2 (klebian, Disciple Slayer)

Disciple Slayer

: 2 (deadscilent, crub)

TheSweatspantsNinja

: 1 (Shanba)

Shanba

: 1 (RossWilliam)

Not voting

: 3 (Ripley, tyhess, skitzer)

With 13 it takes 7 to lynch. Please let me know if anyone needs prodding. Posting should pick up after New Year's here.

[Phate]

Vote: TheSweatpantsNinja

[Shanba]

Shanba.....I don't like how definate your being, with not that much bearing to be definite on. I think TSN's post is decidedly innocent. While it's a crummy strategy, a scum's major goal during the day time is to throw confusion into the face of the pro-towners. While he is being crappy at it, this is what DS is doing. So TSN is merely pointing out that maybe we should keep an eye on him. I think it's fine. And now what your doing, Shanba, reeks to me of a scum trying to lynch an innocent. You don't wanna lynch DS, because he's way too much the easy way out. You can paint TSN with just enough scumminess to cover your own tail. So, thusly,

vote: Shanba

OK, fair enough. You think my attack on TSN is me trying to get a townie lynched. You state that I am being too definite for the evidence provided, and that I'm avoiding the DS wagon because its too easy.

WEll, let's first look at a few of your basic assertions.

While it's a crummy strategy, a scum's major goal during the day time is to throw confusion into the face of the pro-towners. While he is being crappy at it, this is what DS is doing.

This is not true. A scum's major goal is to win. He wins by getting pro-towners lynched and avoiding being lynched himself. Creating confusion may help with that goal, but it's not the scums goal. The scum would much rather have a town that was clear, precise, and wrong, than a confused town that was heading in the right direction. As such, DS' posts are not helpful from a scum perspective, as they do not help him do either. You could try and argue that by being so weird he's hoping people will rush to his defence, but that makes no sense as if he hadn't made the posts he wouldn't need to be defended.

Now, the second assertion I contend is

So TSN is merely pointing out that maybe we should keep an eye on him

I don't think this is true. Here is TSN's post:

I'm not sure what to do about DS. Ignore him? Lynch him? I can't get any kind of an actual read on him, and maybe that's the point. If so, I sort of want to lynch him on principle.

Here is what he says here:
1) He doesn't know what to do about DS, whether he should be ignored or lynched
2)He can't get any read on DS
3)Maybe DS is deliberately trying to stop us getting a read on him
4)If that's the case, he maybe should be lynched on principle

Nowhere is there a call for him to be watched. There's a vague call for a lynch and an admittance that he can't read DS play. What's more worrying is there's an underhand sounding out of the town's opinion. If town agree that DS is scummy, it won't look strange if TSN attacks him later. If town decide that DS is probably town, then TSN doesn't need to follow through. It's a classic on the fence sort of post, and nowhere does it mention keeping an eye on DS or seeing how things develop or anything of that vein.

The final assertion I would like to contest is this one:

I don't like how definate your being, with not that much bearing to be definite on

This statement assumes that a) I was being definite and b) being definite is sucmmy. The first is true, the second is not. Think to yourself. What reasons could scum have for being definite? Perhaps they want to inflate a weak case. Go wild, I'm sure there are many reasons a scum would do it that could be thought up. But there are consequences too. If you are definite about something, you can't then pull out later. This causes problems for scum, as one of scum's goals is to lynch townies. Flexibility in the lynch choice is much more useful for scum, especially early in the day. Hence my dislike of TSN's post.
Now, what reasons could town have to be definite? Well, for one thing it gives more interesting reactions. People react to statements like "X is scum" more than they react to statements like "X seems scummy to me" - your own post is a case in point. Especially early in the day, these sort of statements can open up discussion, such as this one. To be sure, my certainty is an overstatement - I can't be certain that TSN is scum. But that doesn't matter. If you beat about the bush forever, people get bored, lose interest. Better to be definite.

In the end, it tends to be a playstyle thing. Some very good players are always definite, others leave room for doubt. One thing it isn't is a scumtell (at least, for most people. If it's out of the ordinary for someone, that may be different.)

Now, finally, there may be some merit to this:

You don't wanna lynch DS, because he's way too much the easy way out.

It's true, scum or town, I would not jump on the DS wagon. That's more to do with how crap it is rather than how easy it is, though. There may also be some merit to this:

You can paint TSN with just enough scumminess to cover your own tail

Sure, scum want to attack scummy people. The idea that I'm trying to cover my own tail, though, is somewhat... laboured, and I'd be interested to see how you reached that conclusion. Is it merely that you disagree with my attack on TSN? If it is, that's kinda crap. Disagreeing with someone =/= them being scum. Hence why I'm not voting for you.

[skitzer]

Phate: Explanation of vote?

Crub: Your last post up there: Pseudo-QFT. I'm lazy and don't want to quote it.

SweatspantsNinja: I'm not exactly sure about what a policy lynch is, but I'm sure it's not a good idea. Like he said, he is pretty unreadable when he plays like this. I'm not saying it's a good thing. To me, DS is kind of saying, "Ha, ha, you can't see through this!"

[Phate]

Skitzer: because my former vote was random, because I agree with Shanba, and because mentioning the above two facts as reasoning for voting is just as bad or worse than simply voting without explanation, even if they're true and the extent of your reasoning.

[RossWilliam]

Shanba....you've explained yourself very well, and I appreciate that. And because I'm finding Phate much more alarming, i'm going to change my vote.

unvote, vote: Phate

Phate......votes without reason are sketchy at best, you should have expected someone to ask. and I'm confused as to what your issue with skitzer is. What post did he make such horrifying reasoning? your throwing me through a loop.

[Shanba]

Actually...

skitzer, are you or are you not in favour of a DS lynch?

[Phate]

Ross, I know my sentences are convoluted when I'm in a hurry, but take a minute and decipher them instead of jumping to conclusions.

The extent of my reasons for voting are as follows:
I agree with Shanba, and have nothing further to add to his analysis.
My former vote was random, and this one's not.

However, voting and using either or both of those reasons by themselves is a sure way to get zealous townies and opportunistic scum to jump on you, even though they are right now completely true and valid.

[klebian]

I mostly agree with shanba's post. I have some discrepancies with the discussion on definitiveness but I agree that it's mostly playstyle and so it doesn't matter that much. I actually don't like ross's defense of TSN, especially his statement that TSN's post was decidedly innocent. I also do not like how he implies that Disciple is scum but decides to vote shanba for being definite and seeming like scum trying to vote innocent....

Vote: rosswilliam

Phate, i'm not so sure that voting without reason is worse than voting for a weak reason. That's pretty much all I can really say now that I think about it. I agree with ross that you couldn't have expected no one to ask you why you voted... I guess all I can say is if you don't think your reason is strong it's probably not enough for a vote...

[skitzer]

Shanba: I think that a DS lynch is not a good idea, as I aforementioned, he is quite hard to read, and although the sanity of this game would be increased with him gone, the well-being may be severely detrimented because we have no hard evidence on him except for his blatant posts.

TheSweatpantsNinja was likely trying to lynch DS for easier gameplay. I can see both sides of this argument.

FomS: Shanba
FomS: TheSweatpantsNinja

[Shanba]

:\

I dislike that post. And yet, I get kinda hard to explain god vibes.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

Here is what he says here:
1) He doesn't know what to do about DS, whether he should be ignored or lynched
2)He can't get any read on DS
3)Maybe DS is deliberately trying to stop us getting a read on him
4)If that's the case, he maybe should be lynched on principle

That is pretty much what I said. What I meant, and perhaps should have made more explicit, was that we should either lynch DS today or move on with the discussion, because at the time there was no other discussion. I suppose we've chosen the move-on option, which is fine. I'd rather it not have moved on to me, but at least we aren't still discussing the player who I concede I can't get any read on, because he's being intentionally useless.

Shanba and phate are lining on opposite sides of the debate as rosswilliam. I don't find any of them terribly scummy. I don't particularly suspect skitzer either, but in my own defense, I will point out that I'm not the only one refusing to take a position. I do suspect the lurkers. Perhaps its just an effect of the holidays, but only about half the players are really discussing the game.

[RossWilliam]

I actually don't like ross's defense of TSN, especially his statement that TSN's post was decidedly innocent. I also do not like how he implies that Disciple is scum but decides to vote shanba for being definite and seeming like scum trying to vote innocent....

I'm sorry...I'm not always the clearest typer. Neither of those two sentiments were supposed to have closure in them. I was just trying to point out possibilities, and interpetations. it would be very silly for me to be definate in a post condemning definity. and even if DS and shanba were both scum (even though I changed my mind about shanba with his defense), shanba is clearly the more theatening of the two, so targeting him first makes sense. It doesn't anymore, though, because the consensus, which I now agree with, is that he's less suspicious.

my vote on Phate remains. I'm still confused by your intentions, maybe i'm just not picking up on something blatant, and if that's the case I feel stupid. But I interperated the situation as you making an unexplained vote, and than attacking someone making the logical response. Until something more scummy comes up with someone else, I feel no reason why that doesn't warrent at least my one vote.

[klebian]

If you meant it that way then I would agree with you, however I really don't like the way you actually did state it in that post, so the vote stays.

[RossWilliam]

fair enough. Your just as entitled to your opinions as I am, and I feel like debating isn't gonna help either of us change our minds. Haha I'll start sweating if you inadvertatly started an RW bandwagon, but for now...well, fair enough.

[skitzer]

dramamoose has posted once, I feel a prod would be of great need.

[Shanba]

fair enough. Your just as entitled to your opinions as I am, and I feel like debating isn't gonna help either of us change our minds. Haha I'll start sweating if you inadvertatly started an RW bandwagon, but for now...well, fair enough.

Blaaah...

scummy vibes.

[RossWilliam]

Blaaah...

scummy vibes.

no real reason why. this verges on OMGUS.