Re-reading D1 I think my initial Deimos wagon analysis has renewed relevance because of ABR and votato townflips.
In post 588, Deimos27 wrote:1. Firebringer
Firebringer has a fluffy meta that he has equity not to break as scum (correct me if I'm wrong that a long ISO analysis is rather uncharacteristic of him) unless he
needs
his wagon to catch traction or he
needs
to be townread. The top three wagons were tied against not-Firebringer. This means there was no real threat to him, and unless the scumteam is exactly Firebringer/Norwegian/votato/Green Crayons, scum!Firebringer had an easier target to push than Deimos.
Conclusion: scum!Firebringer -> unlikely
...
4. Green Crayons
His vote timing is weird because he checks with Firebringer first whether "scum raccoon" means voteworthy, and only joins after the other three votes, which comes off as potential opportunism. I also don't see how any of Firebringer's points demonstrate scum-indicative behaviour, but then again, I didn't see how HEM quoting three scumleans is town-indicative, so it could be I just operate on a very different wavelength than Crayons. And there's plenty of town motivation to pressure me into producing a readslist and vote.
Conclusion: NAI
The wagon didn't last that long, but the fact that it didn't get further than L-3 still increases the likelihood that there's at least one scum on it. Out of GC/FB, GC's push felt far more opportunistic — checking first for others to initiate the wagon (
358) before joining in with what amounts to a naked vote (
404). The possible town motivation I give in this quote (pressuring me into providing an explicit readslist and vote) doesn't seem correct because it's not how GC explained himself. The probabilities to weigh are therefore {GC is opportunistic scum} vs {GC is town that scumread Deimos} but his whole case about me being IIoA and not pushing my reads, when all my catch-up was chock-full of analysis and questioning people (the purpose of which is precisely to develop my reads, if not to "push" them), is still bizarre to me.
That in itself probably isn't strongly AI, but the point is that my wagon stalling at L-3 increases the probability of there being scum on it and with ABR + votato cleared that extra probability is funneled into FB/GC, which should tip the scales towards this play being somewhat scum-indicative.
Later when GC places his initial L-2 vote on Cycle Men we had that little back-and-forth about his reasoning for it and it still doesn't sit well with me that it's based on the associative assumption that I am town, because if you are genuinely uncertain about my alignment (which should be 67% from his POV) and the part of my case you're relying on is only scum-indicative when town!Deimos = True then that
seriously
waters down the scum-indicativeness of Cycle Men's comment — so it looks like GC proclaiming a nullread on me is inconsistent with the level of confidence in my alignment that his play indicates. Which could imply scum cogdis between factual knowledge of my alignment and feigned uncertainty about my alignment.
I settled on a townread on that interaction in an earlier re-read because I thought it wouldn't make sense for scum!GC to force this convoluted justification to bus his own buddy, when he could just be pushing town (my assumption being that scum wouldn't bus unless there was such strong reasoning presented it couldn't be ignored), but now seeing as Norwee was on that wagon and this was before Cycle Men's "activation", it coheres perfectly with a scum-driven bus strategy.