[Path-Shaper]

Post times are on thread, yes, but it is still a speculative meta argument unless I completely misunderstand the definition of meta.

My initial inclination is not to mod-kill anybody, just give a warning - but this has nothing to do with a player's actual play, but when they allegedly are or are not on thread.

[Spite]

Tennes, on 06 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Path-Shaper, on 06 December 2011 - 10:17 PM, said:

B6) Post information on the thread relating to another player's past or current activity on (or absence from) the board that would not otherwise be available to anybody reading the thread. Refrain from using meta arguments in thread, or from referring to your reasons as being based on meta.

I thought this shit would be clear by now. I know, I didn't copy and paste the basic rules onto this game thread, but we've had this come up again and again (I myself have been guilty of it).

This ends now, and I'm going to have to take a closer read to see if this calls for mod-kill. Getting ready for work now, so I'll make a ruling after I get to work.

uhm...i believe posting times is not meta.
it is information available to everyone on thread.

I agree. All I did was point out who hadn't posted during the day of the finder reveal. That is information that everyone could see on thread.

[Gamelon]

I have only a minute to post, got to work a few more hours

The things that's sticking out at me is Spite. He lays in the weeds for days, then jumps up 5 seconds after a killer is lynched, and says "Hey Let me help!"

Theories about killers timing are useless here and I can't believe it;s gotten this much attention He's ready to vote for anybody as long as it's not him. It seems like distraction all over the place. The only people he's not looking to vote are the ones that are around when he's talking and/or PIs

[Path-Shaper]

I've asked for opinions in SH. I've also personally advocated for rule B6 to be re-worded* since in its current incarnation it is vague, which is why I'm inclined to not mod-kill anyone.



*I think this needs to be addressed by mafia mod-gods/players soon.

[Emurlahn]

Meta would be... I alted Spite as STD, and claimed he was acting way differently than he usually does, so he must be scum.

I think.

[Path-Shaper]

If anyone remembers the red spy game where I lost the game for town because I made the decision that because HD must not have been on thread, he couldn't be the red-spy. This was talked about by PeanutButta and everyone as having lost the game due to faulty meta-reasoning.

So ever since then, I've thought of "meta" as also being posting time related or basically anything that wasn't actual thread content written by players.

Rule B6 needs a more thorough definition of what "meta" is.



Gotta catch my bus.

[Tennes]

Path-Shaper, on 06 December 2011 - 10:26 PM, said:

Post times are on thread, yes, but it is still a speculative meta argument unless I completely misunderstand the definition of meta.

My initial inclination is not to mod-kill anybody, just give a warning - but this has nothing to do with a player's actual play, but when they allegedly are or are not on thread.

i am fairly certain you are not understanding the meaning.



Spite is not claiming to know for a fact that anyone is, or is not on thread for sure because of some "outside knowledge".
He would have to know Atrhal in real life or somewhere outside the thread...and the disclose this fact on thread as his proof. THEN its meta.


The fact is that atrhal did not post in thread between the reveal and the lynch....and that is information that everyone has.
Spite has then fairly speculated as a result on a possible scenario that could be case.
It's not meta.

but i can see how you can confuse it.

[Spite]

Path-Shaper, on 06 December 2011 - 10:28 PM, said:

I've asked for opinions in SH. I've also personally advocated for rule B6 to be re-worded* since in its current incarnation it is vague, which is why I'm inclined to not mod-kill anyone.



*I think this needs to be addressed by mafia mod-gods/players soon.

Honestly I still don't think I did anything wrong. Why wouldn't someone question why a finder wasn't targeted? I can only think of two good reasons. One he isn't really a finder or two a provisional went into affect so night could resolve. That seems like solid reasoning to me and not meta any bullshit.

[Spite]

I know that my reasoning could be off. I just think it's an important point that needs to be discussed.

[Spite]

Emurlahn, on 06 December 2011 - 10:29 PM, said:

Meta would be... I alted Spite as STD, and claimed he was acting way differently than he usually does, so he must be scum.

I think.

Well you were wrong. STD is dead. He was Galain

[Emurlahn]

Again, or killers that went after someone else because they thought there was a healer and they didn't want to waste a nk. I'm thinking you're right, though.

[Tennes]

Path-Shaper, on 06 December 2011 - 10:33 PM, said:

If anyone remembers the red spy game where I lost the game for town because I made the decision that because HD must not have been on thread, he couldn't be the red-spy. This was talked about by PeanutButta and everyone as having lost the game due to faulty meta-reasoning.

So ever since then, I've thought of "meta" as also being posting time related or basically anything that wasn't actual thread content written by players.

Rule B6 needs a more thorough definition of what "meta" is.



Gotta catch my bus.

meta is simply disclosing information, or using information that is not in the thread to make a case.

like you know dibs posts during certain times...but all of the sudden he comes on at a very different time to defend himself,
or you spotted dibs in the forum and you alted him but he is purposefully hiding and not commenting on a case made on himself.

I suppose its been construed with people and posting times as a result of this being the main thing meta was used for in the past.

[Emurlahn]

Spite, on 06 December 2011 - 10:38 PM, said:

Emurlahn, on 06 December 2011 - 10:29 PM, said:

Meta would be... I alted Spite as STD, and claimed he was acting way differently than he usually does, so he must be scum.

I think.

Well you were wrong. STD is dead. He was Galain

I know silly, I was trying to give an example.

[Spite]

Gamelon, on 06 December 2011 - 10:28 PM, said:

I have only a minute to post, got to work a few more hours

The things that's sticking out at me is Spite. He lays in the weeds for days, then jumps up 5 seconds after a killer is lynched, and says "Hey Let me help!"

Theories about killers timing are useless here and I can't believe it;s gotten this much attention He's ready to vote for anybody as long as it's not him. It seems like distraction all over the place. The only people he's not looking to vote are the ones that are around when he's talking and/or PIs

Oh someone chooses to show up when they are getting some heat.

I claimed last week that I would be more active this week. Guess what? I am. I did what I said I was going to do. In your defense from your perspective I should be scruitinized for my absense last week. It wasn't ideal but I got busier earler than I expect to be. I'm trying to make up for it.

[Tennes]

bit of omgus from gamelon there me thinks




ok...now i REALLY must be off to bed

[Spite]

Emurlahn, on 06 December 2011 - 10:38 PM, said:

Again, or killers that went after someone else because they thought there was a healer and they didn't want to waste a nk. I'm thinking you're right, though.

I personally think that almost any town role other than a finder I think that a killer can wait on targeting with a night kill so as not to waste one. A finder is a direct threat that a killer can't defend themselves against. In my opinion they have to risk a healer healing a finder just to eliminate the danger they pose them. Every day they wait clears more players for town and may expose them any day without warning. If I was a killer there was no way I wouldn't immediately target the finder. To hell if there could be a healer or not.

[Spite]

Tennes, on 06 December 2011 - 10:44 PM, said:

bit of omgus from gamelon there me thinks




ok...now i REALLY must be off to bed

Ya think. I was actually leaning more towards Atrahal than him anyway.

[Atrahal]

Finally back, and again I see that thoughts have turned to me. Why why why? I see a lot of "well he's scummier than him" going on, but not much else.

[Atrahal]

Ok, well, my money is on Gamelon or Tennes. Take a look back at Gamelon: http://forum.malazan...f5a11e4e5f10b19

Notice anything? What I see is someone who comes on, says sorry can't stay, and then pops in a suggestion or vote before dodging out. We know that Mockra was a particular vocal player and if we go with the paired killer theory, an easy strategy is one talker and one sleeper cell.

Now Tennes is another type of beast. Most recently I am suspicious of a couple of things. First of all, I really received some gut tweaks from his buddying up with Anom all the sudden. Compare this to his prior plays of buddying up with Mockra against HP (which, yes I know was a long time ago, but it was a very clear picture of his play style which is showing up again at my expense currently).

[Spite]

I went back and looked at the last time that Meanas posted. Discounting the weekend it's been two full days since his last post. Maybe PS should shoot him a PM to see if he forgot that he was playing.