mini #585 - A Tempest Has Formed (Over), Thanks Patrick!!

[Gaspode]

also, is this the road to rome?

Well, if it is indeed a road, it must lead there. But as I understand it, we're currently in Little Italy, as this is a normal mini.

Oh yeah, /confirm.

[Gaspode]

Sorry to do this so early on, but I'll be away from Tuesday morning to Thursday evening (GMT). It's possible I'll have web access, but not terribly likely.

[Gaspode]

There's (slow) wifi on UK trains! Who knew? I'm kind of disappointed I missed the random vote phase--I was looking forward to some ridiculous IS-like behavior.

FOS: CoheedCambria

. The "no tells" and "discussion" posts are both small tells in themselves.

FOS: marmalade and EvilGorrillaz

. Random-voting someone who can't post doesn't do much good, in my opinion. And EvilGorrillaz seems quite bandwagon happy.

major FOS: ashmite

. That was a really, really great way to start a bandwagon without being too personally involved. The vast majority of players I've seen (including myself) have pulled that one at least once (usually unsuccessfully).

No vote yet, just some observations.

Also: why was the vote count included in populartajo's post? It caused me some major confusion.

[Gaspode]

Disagree. The most we could discern from that is that he is trying to push the day and getting impatient, which is already a stretch.

JEEP wrote a great article entitled "ScumTells" a few years ago, which is now on the wiki. If I remember right, according to his very extensive research, the first person to ask for "evidence" in a game is about 5 or 10% more likely to be scum or a cop. I considered the "no tells" post to be an extension of this, except that it probably doesn't say anything about copness, as it relates to in-thread "tells" and not "hard" evidence. I think there might be something in there about substance-less "we need discussion" posts too. Even if it doesn't, the "we haven't had discussion" post was pretty pointless, which occasionally can be considered a small tell.

Both points are obviously relatively minor, which is why I didn't vote based on either.

And I agree, alvinz, that bandwagons are a very important part of the game, and "bandwagon hunting" isn't always bad. It was just something else I noticed regarding EvilGorrillaz' behavior that is occasionally considered scummy. Without the other stuff, I probably wouldn't have even included it in my post.

Re: Marmalade, EvilGorrillaz on voting someone who's away:
Yes, you were supposed to know I couldn't post--I mentioned on page one that I was going to be in Scotland with little or no access from Tuesday to Thursday.

That said, I suppose it's not such a terrible thing to vote someone who's away for a couple of days--I just tend to think that in the random phase, voting someone who

is

around is much more likely to provoke a useful reaction. In this case, I suppose it's moot, because it's promoted discussion anyway, and I didn't have to go as long as I originally thought without internet access.

[Gaspode]

Also, lynch all lurkers np

I believe the quote (again according to JEEP) is "Lynch All Liars". :p

Also, I'm Scottish, and we do have internet, you know. Wink

Oh yes, I know--I even got free wifi on the train up there. That's miles ahead of us automobile-centric Americans. I just didn't have time and wanted to save myself the money.

Populartajo, I am not going to bring meta into this game, so don't ask me about my previous games, unless you want to go and look them up yourself.
Also, do you think that newbiness is an ok excuse for scummy play?

Yes and no. Certain behavior is less scummy when executed by a newbie. Similarly, some things are more scummy when there's a newbie involved. I don't have the time or brainpower to come up with examples right now, but I'm sure you can imagine such a situation.

Also, I'm sure that over my couple of years of inactivity I've missed multitudes of philosophical discussions on the relevance of metagame logic, and I can see why you wouldn't want to be the one to start such a discussion, but I think it's a perfectly legitimate thing to take into consideration when analyzing someone's playing style.

In response to Populartajo's post: I did not cast a vote because I didn't yet want to start anyone on the road to a lynch. I feel like the random voting is over, but I don't feel like there's enough there yet for me to start a serious wagon. The reason I used the "major FOS" was that I had already FOS'ed a bunch of people in my post, and I felt this was a little bit of a bigger deal. I admit it was a bit hypocritical, in hindsight, but when I see one person's FOS leading to a possible bandwagon, I start to think of common scum flying-under-the-radar tactics.

On a less intense note, welcome to the board, CoheedCambria. I was under the impression that they made everyone play at least one "Newbie Game" nowadays, but I'm glad to see someone going with the classic "trial by fire" approach. It worked out pretty well for MeMe and myself back in Mini 15 (although unlike her, I didn't end up on the winning side).

[Gaspode]

I don't like it.

Well you really should learn to like it. When played online, a LOT of mafia is metagaming, even if in a broader sense than "what did Evilgorrilaz do in his last four games?"

I wish this were vote-worthy, because I think it's a bad attitude, but it really doesn't say anything about scumminess--just about [bad] play style. (Although there are arguments for lynching people with bad strategies, but I won't get into that--most are metagame related ).

More useful comments to come in the next day or two--I'm too tired to think at the moment.

[Gaspode]

I'm not a big fan of rundowns in general, especially organized mass ones. I just don't find them all that productive. Also, I almost never think about who's "most townly"--my focus is always on who's most suspicious.

I really want to cast a vote, as I feel like I started a trend of wimpy, game-slowing FOS's, but I'd like to hear from the lurkers (i.e. Cream, Hypatia, and Elias) first. I feel like there's a good chance there's at least one scum in the crowd of lurkers who's just getting a free pass.

[Gaspode]

On second thought, it seems that Cream and Hypatia have both posted recently. They just haven't really said anything.

And I second the request for use of grammar and the shift key by CoheedCambria. I erroneously feel like you haven't said anything worthwhile because it's all been lower case, abbreviated, etc.

So anyway, more substance, less parroting on everyone's part please. We've heard the argument about the lynch all lurkers quote plenty of times already, and I care as little about that sentence as I did when it was first posted.

I intend to force myself to vote once Elias has posted something, because this day needs to move. However, I wouldn't object to having other substantive things appear in the meantime.

(Looking back, both of these posts seem a bit pretentious. Sorry if I come off that way, I don't mean to.)

[Gaspode]

Vocabulary-wise, Brits don't seem to talk very differently from Yanks. I'm not really the best person to judge by, though--I'm American myself. I'm just studying here for a few months.

As for wanting versus wanting to force myself, I don't see much difference. I would like to cast a vote to move the game along, but cannot make a decision. Within the next couple of days, I will force myself to make that decision. What's so confusing?

The main intent of my second post was to clarify the first, mainly with respect to people lurking versus just not being terribly helpful (which can be considered a form of lurking, I suppose).

[Gaspode]

Well, if there's a certain player that a lot of people say in thread is pro-town, and no one thinks is scummy, scum will be likely to NK them because they'll know for sure that they'll have trouble getting a bandwagon going on that person, and there won't really be any way to link them to the kill. I mean, sure, to a certain extent, they can find the most townie looking players without our help, but people stating it in thread just gives them a more definite idea of their best targets without any particular benefit to the town.

And so begins the doc WIFOM.

I will stand by my promise to vote after an Elias post. I liked his post, which scares me a bit, because that could mean he's just very good scum, but I see nothing suspicious about him so far.

For now, I will

vote: alvinz95

. Partly based on Mellowed's logic of being agreeable and careful, also somewhat based on the fact that he seems to be trying to take charge of the game and be extremely helpful. Sometimes this means someone's just a useful pro-town person, but it can also be a scum tactic (especially for someone who's been around for a few months--long enough to be trying different stuff like that, but not long enough to know it is extremely difficult to pull off). Finally, post 101 is one of the worst posts of this game--in addition to many other problems, the quote about "he is BY FAR not on my scum list" is either incredibly stupid townness (starting Elias off on the innocent side of the spectrum, rather than in the middle) or more unnecessary scum friendliness.

[Gaspode]

Reasons for my vote:

-I liked Mellowed Man's reasoning, for the most part.
-Yes, I made two comments about how it can go either way. However, I think the clarifications of both make it clear that the scum angle seems a bit more likely: a) he's probably at the perfect semi-newb state to pull that strategy, and b) stupidity of the caliber I was referring to is rare on this board.
-This game needs to move along, and I had promised a vote. I'd hardly call it a bandwagon--it's two votes and an FOS. It's page five, on Day 1. If things don't start happening, we won't have a majority until Christmas.

[Gaspode]

Sorry for double posting, there were some simu-posts I wanted to respond to.

I'm still kind of curious why everyone describes me as "wagon happy".
If I was wagon happy, then I would be on the alvinz wagon, but I am not.

Admittedly, this is somewhat true, but it's not really useful coming from Evilgorillaz himself, as it creates WIFOM issues.

However, I will make a comment about the "wagon-happiness". I just realized that I was one of the ones who (unintentionally) started that whole conversation! Looking back on his posts, Evilgorrilaz has only voted twice, in five pages. You can't really consider that wagon-happy. I stand by the idea that his first two wagon choices weren't really great ones, but the wagon-happy argument is ridiculous. It seemed like the right description at the time, but I take back the phrase. Call him on bad choices and/or immediately changing styles upon being called out (if you can say it's possible to establish a "style" in three real-life days of play), but don't call him wagon happy.

I agree with Tajo that CC09 was not bandwagoning--he didn't vote, he fos'ed. It's really more just being a newbie sheep than wagoning. Sorry to pick at semantics, but bandwagoning is such a frequently-used term that we can't really afford to have it misused.

[Gaspode]

<---Product of US public schools. Although to be fair, most of my vocabulary probably didn't come from that. Reading a lot as a kid helped, as did reading sites like this for the past five years (seriously, it helps a lot).

Now, however, it's my turn for vocabulary questions: What do EDWOP and IC mean?

Also, I wouldn't say the argument against you is moot. It's been badly stated for a few pages, but the basic principles still apply. It's just not quite as big a deal as some people have made it (IMO).

[Gaspode]

Night=about 72 hours, on average.
Day=forever, and then some.

I agree that anger, at least in this situation, is not a scumtell. It can contribute to some suspiciousness in some cases, but plenty of pro-town people get angry when confronted with CrapLogic.

Speaking of which, I agree that most of Cream's post was not all that great. However, alvinz' reply, while sufficient in some areas, wasn't all that spectacular. My main problem with it is the attempt to write everything off as "a good townie's reply to other posts simply to promote discussion".

Again I say, the crap-logic was just a reply, not real scumhunting.

This is a terrible defense. Everything after page one is a reply to someone's post. Yes, discussion is good, but that doesn't give you a free pass to say anything you want and then write it off later. If you don't have anything to say, don't say anything. It's not a crime to be quiet for a (real-life) day or two.

[Gaspode]

Now, Gaspode, do you still like your vote for Alvin? What do you think of evilgorrilaz?

Well, I can't say I love it (or that I ever did--I am rarely overjoyed about any day 1 vote), but I don't really see anything that has changed since I voted that would make me unvote (do you? or were you just checking in?). I still don't think there's anyone scummier at the moment. I'm not saying it would be impossible for this to change, but I don't like being flaky with my votes.

Would anyone mind laying out a good case against Evilgorrilaz? All I can see is the following: Stupid bandwagoning at the beginning (which I've discussed before), his dumb "lynch all lurkers" comment (obviously a joke, albeit a bad one), and his refusal to metagame (yes, a bit scummy, but no smoking gun). Maybe I'm missing some of his posts, but the case as it stands right now doesn't seem terribly convincing to me.

[Gaspode]

It takes a whole category of logic and scumhunting out of the game. What if your usual townie playstyle was to be very quiet, serious, and conservative? Then your behavior in this game would be quite unusual, and probably suggest that you had some sort of power role. If we just discounted all metagame logic, we'd be losing out on tips like that. Generally, the more information available, the better things are for the town--thus, being avidly anti-metagame is somewhat scummy.

[Gaspode]

Sorry, the above post was replying to Evilgorrilaz' question about why being anti-metagaming is scummy. Believe it or not, that last post was kind of simuposted with Cream's (I just left the composing page up for way too long).

Cream: any smart player will give a reason when bandwagoning any time after the random vote phase, even if it's just a reference to someone else's reasoning. Posts with nothing but a vote suck.

Also, post 150 just seems like an exercise in petty arguing. There's honestly not much of substance there. I don't understand how the "selective quoting" misrepresented your post--I read it the same way in both cases. I also don't put much stock in the "COMPLETELY uncalled for" argument. I don't even remember the context of the FOS in question, but as soon as you started pointlessly bolding and caps-locking, I stopped caring. Being outraged at someone's method of stating an idea doesn't make either of you right. What matters is the idea itself, which I have totally forgotten.

Anyway, my post got kind of convoluted there, but the main point is both of Cream's posts really annoy me, and have tended to muddy the waters a bit. Thus,

FOS: Cream

. I still find alvinz scummy, but not for any of Cream's reasons.

[Gaspode]

Is it just me, or is this a really pointless, convoluted argument? It seems to me that the vast majority of the things said between Alvinz and Cream are irrelevant exercises in petty bickering, and we're getting nothing done.

It also doesn't help that their posts are nearly incomprehensible--PLEASE PROOFREAD, EVERYONE! That's why we have the preview button. I feel like I hardly know what's going on in this argument, just because everything is just angry, stream-of-consciousness "yelling".

Please, someone else make a coherent post that says something useful.

If you don't know what to talk about, how's this: No one has yet responded to my request for a case against Evilgorrilaz.

[Gaspode]

I'm assuming this means away.

[Gaspode]

My laptop's power cord just stopped working for no reason about two days ago, so I have very limited access (I have to borrow my roommate's charger, and my battery only last for about 20 minutes.)

I probably won't be on much (if at all) until tomorrow night or Monday, when I can hopefully get a charger. Sorry.

[Gaspode]

I have to say, it's kind of pathetic that you guys "can't remember" things. If you're not going to remember what you were thinking in a post, you should either a) not post it (probably preferable) or b) jot something down to remind yourself. We have a "Notes" function, and I'm sure you have a word processor. You have no excuse.

As for those who "didn't go back and check" and such things, that's equally ridiculous. I'm sure as hell not going to waste my time going back to check if you don't think it's worth it, which means I'm just going to throw away your post as useless, because there's no facts to back it up. I've been guilty of this occasionally in the past, but I try to avoid it, and I never do it in an important defense. It's not difficult to find the stuff--just use the "find all posts by" button.

Stuff like that seems like an excuse to say whatever you want, regardless of what the facts actually are. If it's a blatant lie, it's ok--you forgot!

Sorry, this has really been bugging me, because for a majority of this game, I've had no idea what people are referring to without doing a really ridiculous amount of research.

Bottom line--use quotes (with names in the tags), cite post numbers, and just say who/what you're referring to, rather than "he", "you", "that time" etc.

[Gaspode]

I will say, snap judgement, that there looks to have been a lot of baseless accusations and counter accusations based on these. Which means everyone is really getting jumpy, or something I cant think of.

What kind of base would you prefer to have for the initial accusations?

It is Day 1. Considering that, I think we've had some decent discussion.

[Gaspode]

By the way, we should be able to solve this. Just have all three players in question PM their roles to someone outside the game (say, MeMe), and that person can tell us all who Laptop's replacing.

[Gaspode]

If this gets abandoned, this will be my second comeback game in a row (the other being last summer) that was abandoned. That is not a streak I want to start. We must persevere!

[Gaspode]

So on day one, especially, when one player is criticizing another for not having 'good logic' or a good case, I tend to look at the criticizer - because it means they might have ingame knowledge.

The concept is somewhat right, but in this instance, I don't think it's quite applicable.

The thing is, there's a huge difference between logic and inside information or "evidence". CrapLogic (TM) generally refers to people using information from the thread to create illogical arguments. This is ALWAYS bad for the town, as good logic from the thread is one of the only weapons the town has against scum. To me, asking for good logic is like asking people to play well--kind of pointless, but not scummy unless viewed in a "trying to seem helpful but really useless" kind of light.

The idea of asking for "evidence" or hard information of some kind can often be considered a tell--it increases the chances that the poster has some sort of inside info (which could mean cop, scum, or various other things). See jeep's "ScumTells" for a more in-depth description.

iamusername: I sort of explained Post 40 briefly in this post

when I see one person's FOS leading to a possible bandwagon, I start to think of common scum flying-under-the-radar tactics.

It's a pretty basic, common, and usually bad tactic for scum to post a big attack on one player and then not vote for them, so that the next day they can claim they weren't on the bandwagon (when they really started it).

[Gaspode]

http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... mmon_Tells

Also interesting is the Lynch All Liars theory: http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... _All_Liars

Although it seems that fewer people nowadays live by these theories than did in the past (or at least fewer know about them). IMO, they should be required reading for anyone who wants to play this game at a high level. Even if the meta and WIFOM eventually make the specifics of the articles untrue (although I don't think this is very likely), they encourage a certain type of thought process that a lot of people don't seem to bother with these days.

[Gaspode]

At whoever said Jeep's tells and LynchAllLyars are stupid:

What specifically has changed so drastically about the game since Jeep wrote the article? To me, the style of play seems similar, except that people tend to talk a whole lot more than they used to (most mini games tended to be done around now, pagewise).

As for LynchAllLiars, I agree that lynching to enforce a meta isn't the most practical method, but I think the principles behind why you shouldn't lie are legit, and worth a read.

Also I would like to know why is Gaspode voting for Alvin and if the no voters would vote for someone, who would it be.

Well, he hasn't done anything to really refute my original reasons, and the whole spreading crap logic "for the sake of discussion" thing is probably the scummiest thing I've seen the whole game.

[Gaspode]

I agree about the 3rd on a bandwagon thing: that was WIFOM'ed to a relatively permanent death sometime around 2002. Similarly, the other tells probably have lost some of their potency, but I think there are some pretty good principles behind them, and new players are still likely to make some of those mistakes.

[Gaspode]

I will be away with extremely limited access from later today until Friday, May 9th. Sorry for the short notice, things have been busy lately, and I forgot to post this earlier.

Anyway, I'm kind of in a rush, but I'll respond quickly to Marmalade:

I brought up Jeep's tells and LynchAllLiars to explain various suspicions I had. The easiest way to explain them was to refer to an article that I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, was still widely read and discussed. I still stand by my position that they are worth reading, because they help you think more analytically about the game, even if the specific tells aren't exactly accurate anymore. Plus, when I refer to them, you'll know what I'm talking about.

That said, I agree with what you seem to be (at least partially) implying: it's becoming yet another futile, distracting argument. The main point is, my vote for alvinz still stands, for the many reasons I have outlined previously.

If you thought I was trying to "achieve" something else, "pray tell" what it was you had in mind--I can't see any kind of ulterior motive to discussing game-relevant scumtell theory other than perhaps as a distraction, and I don't think it was distracting or irrelevant enough to be an issue.

Also, I just noticed a bit of the latest conversation going on. I don't have time to really analyze the players involved, but Cream is sounding a bit weird at the moment. I'll try to look at his posts more when I get back and give a more concrete explanation for this.

[Gaspode]

Just got back. On a quick read, it seems this game has gone to crap, and we need that mod deadline badly.

Lots of people are looking kind of suspicious, but part of that is because we're all forcing ourselves to talk about nothing for way too long. For now, my vote will stay on alvinz, because he hasn't really refuted any of my suspicions, and has done nothing since I voted him besides arguing pointlessly with others and temporarily disappearing.

I'll reread over the next couple of days and see if I come up with anything else interesting.

[Gaspode]

Gaspode: Welcome back : What about the game suggests that it is going to crap?

Mainly it's that we've been building speculation upon speculation so excessively that it's gotten to the point where you can make a case for pretty much anything--both sides of most arguments are legitimate, because there's so much personal interpretation going on. Day 1 is indeed mainly about speculation, but there comes a point when it ceases to be useful. I believe we've hit that point.

Also, people's posts are getting more and more sloppy and incomprehensible. For example, many sentences are being written in this style: "your actiosn are realy supsicious and youve been voting ofr stupid resaons." I have no problem with the occasional typo, but after awhile, it gets extremely annoying. Also, misuse of contractions and grammar in this game is not only an annoying habit, but also causes confusion about the meaning of any given post, leading to multiple interpretations, and me sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out what the hell you were talking about.

Another, more relevant example: I'm assuming your "Fos" is at Matt_S. However, since you only mention his name once in your post (and it's in the quote tag, mind you), it's not terribly clear whether it's directed at him or a lead-in to the question to me. Is it that hard to say "FOS: Matt_S"? I don't mean to single you out--almost everyone has done this.

Overall, just remember to PROOFREAD and that most people reading your posts CANNOT READ YOUR MIND. Write coherently, and I'll take a lot more stock in what you say. Not to mention that we could probably avoid some of these obnoxious, pointless arguments if people thought twice before posting crap.

[Gaspode]

WIFOM, WIFOM, WIFOM...

I don't have many thoughts on the current conversation, except that it's getting pretty ridiculous, and people are getting into the terrible habits of putting words into each other's mouths, setting up spectacular WIFOMs, and just generally over-analyzing.

FOS: Skruffs and Matt_S

. They're prolonging pointless conversation, which can be used by scum to twist into any kind of evidence they want later on, and just to generally muddy the waters. Could be very impressive scum pair play, one scum leading a townie around in circles, or just two stubborn townies with too much pride and time on their hands. Whatever the case is, most of the recent posts are NOT good for the town at all.

Mod: Can we get an official vote count, please?

And I'm still waiting for a good defense,

alvinz95

. I haven't forgotten about you. Do a "View all posts by" search for me if you don't remember my reasons.

[Gaspode]

Gaspode, if something is amiss, doesn't it make more sense to investigate it rather than to quarantine it?

If you want to make a point, doesn't it make more sense to actually say it rather than to try to create some kind of profound metaphor that no one understands?

[Gaspode]

What is so different from poor reasoning and lack of reasoning?

You tell me, Mr. CrapLogic.

Again, do you think I meant to lynch him? And does my crap-logic contribute to scumminess? No, its just logic I tried to make up to comment on Gaspode. All the things that are held against me are things that I've posted to comment on everyone's posts, like a good town member, always joining conversation. And, the least townie, most townie thing was to "speed up conversation".

[Gaspode]

Sorry, I've been away and busy for awhile. I need to reread a lot of stuff, but will hopefully have something useful to say soon.

At the moment, I'll keep my vote on alvinz, because he hasn't done anything to convincingly change my mind, but lately it seems possible he's just a townie playing really badly, so my vote may change soon.

[Gaspode]

I don't have a whole lot of time at the moment, so I can't quote specific things. However, I know how frustrating it is to not get a response, so I'll give a brief summary now, and hopefully have time to specify later today.

I don't think I'm being all that extreme in my posts against Alvinz. I gave my main reasons for voting him way back, and he never really refuted them. He didn't even respond to them until at least page 15 or so, and even then, all he gave was a sentence or two in defense. If I vote for someone, I expect a response--I'm not going to unvote just because time passes. My main "attacks" after the initial ones have been requests for a response.

However, as I said a couple of days ago, I still need to reread. His recent posts have seemed a bit less scummy, but I haven't read enough to be sure yet.

[Gaspode]

Hey everyone, sorry for lurking. We're getting towards the end of our term here, so I've had two major papers, a presentation, and a recital to prepare for over the past couple of weeks.

On a very quick skim, I noticed someone (I think tajo) "worried" that I've been voting for Alvinz the whole day. I'd just like to reply to that yet again...

I still think my original reasons for voting alvinz were pretty good, and he hasn't really refuted them in any way yet. Is it a great case? No. But there are no great cases right now. We've been going in circles for about 10-15 pages or so.

As I said before, I don't stop suspecting people just because time passes. And if I had it my way, the day would've been over around page 7, whether alvinz was the one lynched or not.

I believe I was asked way back if I suspected anyone else. In a way, yes--I suspect everyone to some degree. However, no one really sticks out much at this point. It seems that some of the reasoning against other vote-getters is decent, but the thing is, if I tried really hard, I could probably create such a case against almost anyone else in the game right now.

Hopefully, I will have time to reread soon and see if there are any bandwagons as worthwhile as my alvinz vote, so we can get things moving.

[Gaspode]

Whoa! Finally things have happened! Now this is actually a mafia game.

Unfortunately, I've done nothing since my last post other than skim the thread for words like "claim" and "lynch", so I don't really know what's going on, but good job getting something to happen, guys!

I have my last paper of the term due in the next 24 hours or so, then I'll hopefully catch up and give my input.

[/finally interested]

[Gaspode]

My apologies for not being around. The truth is, I never expected this entire game to go 36 pages, much less the first day and a half. Thus, I will need to be replaced, as I am back at school and getting busy quickly. I just want to mention a couple of things before I go...

1.

I TOLD YOU SO

2. I can't read the entire Day 2 discussion right now, but I did a search on my name just to see if there was anything I should respond to before leaving. Here's my responses:

- Tajo, I have explained my keeping my vote on alvinz multiple times. If that's unsatisfactory, you'll just have to deal with it. There is something to be said for voting based on relatively early Day 1 behavior, and I believe number 1 above covers it.

- Tajo has been hounding me at least as much as I did alvinz, just without placing a vote on me. Perhaps an alvinz-like attempt to start a wagon without being the first one on it? A stretch, yes, but he seems to be hanging on the issue for way too long (which is ironically what he accused me of doing).

- Personally I think it's idiotic to believe that I could be alvinz' partner, but that's WIFOM coming from me and is therefore useless. In terms of the SK arguments made against me, I honestly don't know why an SK would hound one player for a whole day--I would think that blending in with the inane conversation that made up most of the day would be a much better play. But again, that's slightly wifom-y.

- Ruling out a vig based on weapon is dangerous (I'm pretty sure I've been a vig with a knife in the past) BUT killing a claimed doc is much more an SK move than a vig one, so I think the existence of an SK is a pretty safe assumption to make in this case.

- I went back to look at my Word document of notes from the beginning of the game and found that I had written down Evilz and Coheed as possible scum, with Evilz unlikely to be associated with alvinz, but Coheed to be a possible alvinz partner. I honestly don't remember what the reasoning was and don't have time to figure it out again, but this might be some stuff to think about. Sorry I can't be more specific.


Again, I'm terribly sorry for flaking--I hate when people do this. I just think that my staying in would detract from the quality of the game and make it less enjoyable for both myself and the rest of the players. If anyone has any final questions I will try to log on tomorrow night to answer them if the town and mod so desire, but will need to be replaced after that. Thanks to Miztef and Patrick for running a good game.