Mini 942: Gonzo Mafia - Game Over!

[VP Baltar]

"Be quiet," I said. "I want a look at this thing in good light." He struggled briefly, but I quickly stepped over his leg and hyper-extended his knee until he went rigid, then I braced him and examined the box. It was a standard-issue Body Beeper with a lock-on ankle bracelet--one of the New Age tools now available to law enforcement agencies everywhere, for purposes of electronic House Arrest for those who have been brought

within The System

, but for whom there is no room in the overcrowded jails, pens, and prisons. The United States of America has more people locked up than any other country in the world, including Cuba and South Africa.

---

Vote Count 1-4

:

xRECKONERx ~ L-3 (hohum, Debonair Danny DiPietro, kyle99, ekiM)

ekiM ~ L-4 (Locke Lamora, ortolan, Vi)
flinter ~ L-5 (Percy, Zachrulez)
hohum ~ L-6 (Sotty7)
Sotty7 ~ L-6 (xRECKONERx)

Not Voting: flinter

With

12

alive, it takes

7

to lynch. Deadline is March 31 at roughly 3 p.m. (GMT -4).

[ekiM]

@ekiM: I've seen Vi play as both, and I think she tends to be a bit more cautious/reserved when scum. She's kinda just letting it fly here without any thought of "Oh shit, will this get me flak/get my lynched?" Basically, when I've seen Vi-scum, she flies under the radar, something Vi is not doing here.

Do you think she's aware of her scum meta? Could she be playing against it?

As far as actual suspicions, I'd have to say

Vote: Sotty7

. Thanks for reminding me.

Based on what you said in 92 I guess.

---

flinter - I'd do the same as scum, unless I thought I could exploit it for my nefarious ends---making a townie look bad, for example.

How would you answer the question that you posed?

[ekiM]

flinter, thinking about your question more: I remember a game where someone attacked me for what seemed like a ridiculous reason D1, then continued to attack me for something that seemed weak D2, and the rest of the game. I struggled to see how they could be arguing in good faith. It turned out they weren't---they were scum.

If someone is attacking someone for reasons that don't ring true, then that's a legitimate reason to suspect them. If their thought process doesn't seem genuine, often it will be because they are arguing in bad faith and have misjudged the legitimacy of their attack.

The problem was, on D1 at least some town players agreed that the `ridiculous' reason was legitimate. Sometimes town players think very differently to one another.

[Sotty7]

you mean I missed one? I did say what I thought about reck.

Or did you mean my own question?

Yeah I meant your question. Although if you want to wait until others answer or chose not to answer I'd be fine with that.

ekiM, you highlight recks vote on me, any reason why? What's your impression of it?

[Locke Lamora]

Sotty: I'm taking a particular interest in Zach's early vote-hopping because we literally just finished another game with each other, as you might know (Mini 918 for those who don't). He replaced into that as scum and I remember him putting his vote about very little. He also wasn't particularly active (although part of that was completely out of his control). As for whether I find it scummy, not particularly. What Vi called his 'activity police' act after only 24 hours I thought was unjustified, but I can see why town-Zach would be looking at me for lurking early on when in his experience I've been active as town and lurky as scum. What I found a little odd is that he said his random vote was completely arbitrary when he was obviously interested in pressuring me early on in the game. In short, getting a mild town read off Zach early on, I get the impression he's genuinely interested in finding scum.

As for Vi, I have to agree with DDD that I'm really enjoying the posting style. Don't agree with him on ekiM, I think he's just looking to get into the game and gather some info with a few questions and I don't see anything scummy about that. I thought it was interesting that Vi noted Flutter is posting to type so far - it didn't seem to be a statement that indicated any specific thoughts about alignment but left room for defending Flutter later should the need arise. Keeping him on a neutral read until I get more used to the style.

ekiM: I'm looking at the random votes of anyone on the Reck wagon on that front. Kyle in particular, as he leapt on the wagon and hasn't posted since. It was an easy 'random' vote to make yet still got a viable Reck wagon going - exactly the kind of thing that could be excused later simply by claiming its randomness.

I played Lost Mafia with Reckoner a while back and I thought he was scummy as hell D1 but he turned out to be town. His push on Zach and then change of position is terrible but not unfamiliar - I remember him misreading a post on D1 in that previous game that got him into a lot of trouble because he built some half-joking case based around CDB's role history. I'm not reading too much into this Zach vote as a result.

Kyle: what do you think of Reckoner right now?

[Percy]

I've noted the fact that you [Vi] would sooner play to maintain your status than to catch scum.

Are you talking just about this game, or about other games as well?

xRx's vote/attack on Zachrulez looks terrible. I have a personal dislike for people who misrepresent and abuse meta arguments, especially when you contrive one to create a case that your target has already partially answered (the Locke/zach interaction from just before).

I checked out zach's link, and it looks like 5 votes in 148 posts before being mislynched. Importantly, zach replaced in after the RVS. xRx (1) backs off immediately, and (2) without acknowledging the fact that zach replaced in after the RVS. If that game is his only game with zach, then he has no precedent to work with whatsoever as to his behaviour in the RVS.

I find xreck to be inproductive. Voting for votehopping is not so great, asking for games and then saying the person clearly is concious about his scumplay, is almost setting someone up. But this doesn't have to be done by scum, and I think it is "bad" play.

Sure, it doesn't

have

to be done by scum, but do you think it's

more likely

to be done by scum? Why are you dismissing this as a scumtell altogether?

if you are scum, and someone makes a point against you that is quite ridiculous, what do you do:

A calmly explain why it is ridiculous.
B call that person a moron, etc.
C something else (please explain what you would do)

Depends on whether I'm scumhunting too (multiscum games), but I'd probably avoid explaining and letting the evidence speak for itself (with a link or some such). Overdefensiveness is a scumtell that has worked for me in the past, and I try to avoid it myself.

The thing with Reckoner is he made his first non-arbitrary vote with a no-good reason and even when corrected keeps trying to insinuate Zach's up to no good based on... nothing. Not great.

Strong agree, also lolz.

I don't want to put xRx at L-1 yet, but I understand that early bandwagons are designed to pile on the pressure, and xRx has reacted poorly. His "Unvote whoops well are you going to kill me because if not let's forget it ever happened" is another example of that.

[kyle99]

Ugh, sorry guys, I've been busy with school this past week. It's the weekend now, so I should be able to be somewhat active.

My opinion on xReck is fairly town. I've never played with him as scum, but I've played with him many times as town and his current playstyle fits his town meta well.

I'm gonna

unvote

my RV, and

FoS: Zack

. His vote seems to be going every which way, but I don't think it warrants a vote yet.

[Vi]

Vote: Reckoner

ekiM ~ L-4 (Locke Lamora, ortolan, Vi)

Unvotes are required.

WHAT A SCOOP!

---

"Shred Guy Town Read Unearthed; Thank-You Notes Sent to Scum and Eager Townies On Convenient Wagon", end quote.
I see xRx as meaning well but doing a really poor job of... anything.
I don't know if that's a meta-indicator of alignment or not, but if nothing else

I

can understand where he's coming from and on intuition I don't think what he's doing is scum-motivated.

This is not a post restriction (certainly not an objective one), and I don't think hohum asking about it is pro-Town when there are certainly better things he could be asking about.

Not liking Vi's vote on ekiM. I'm not following the logic here, seems to be actively avoiding hohum.

Much as I wouldn't mind a vote on hohum, right now I'm looking at someone else. Again, multiple suspects, one vote. Hold me accountable to the hohum suspicion when I'm done exploring.
Until then, what is

your

opinion on ekiM?

I thought it was

interesting

that Vi noted Flutter is posting to type so far - it didn't seem to be a statement that indicated any specific thoughts about alignment but left room for defending Flutter later should the need arise.

Define please.

---

Outside of xRx I'm getting a lot of scummish reads from almost everyone who has posted since my most recent post. This isn't good.

The other person I reflexively wanted to call Town on was flinter, for her relatively guile-free post 88. However, there's something fairly substantial bothering me.
"Ambiguously Townish Game Reviewed; Early Playstyles Considerably Different", end quote.
I would like an interview with flinter about the difference.

For right now ekiM still bothers me enough that I don't want to move my vote.
---Question of the Day: Who does ekiM particularly suspect?--- (I see xRx; the rest of his posts are Spreading the Fear about me and flinter)

--Double Spoiler! Same question for Percy!--

[Percy]

I'm not happy with xRx, and I'm not that interested in giving him much latitude simply because he was bandwagonned first.

I don't like hohum's play so far. Sound and fury, signifying nothing, excused with belligerent "I'll pressure who I want!". I find it scummy. If he has played like this before as town, I'd appreciate a link.

I don't like ortolan's agreeing with hohum about your "post restriction", as much as I don't like hohum asking about it.

I'm reserving judgement about flinter. Depending on her next post, I'll probably switch to one of the above three.

[ortolan]

I don't like ortolan's agreeing with hohum about your "post restriction", as much as I don't like hohum asking about it.

I disagree with your apparent policy attitude to post restrictions. I don't see any particular reason why bringing up the topic of post restrictions when they are apparently present is scummy. In many games scum themselves are given post restrictions. Conversely, faking post restrictions for whatever reason if one is a townie can also lead to getting mislynched down the track. I think it's generally inevitable that they get discussed and don't see any obvious benefit in leaving them as the "elephant in the room". Also, how would you have preferred I acted in response to hohum's post if you apparently found my reaction scummy?

I didn't like Reck's throwaway "either lynch me or look elsewhere" line. From the impression I get of his meta (which comes from at least one ongoing game) I *believe* he gets more frustrated as town when his lynch is looking likely (as I do myself). So this "hey guys I'm happy to die if it will serve the town good" looks a bit too casual and contrived for me. The only thing that gives me pause is that the read on Vi looks genuine (I suspect this wouldn't be too hard for reck to fake as scum though).

Unvote

Vote: xReckonerx

I'm gonna

unvote

my RV, and

FoS: Zack

. His vote seems to be going every which way, but I don't think it warrants a vote yet.

Any other suspects kyle?

[hohum]

Percy: why do you have a problem with me asking about post restrictions? It's a fair question and if he is under a post restriction we have the right to know about it.

[hohum]

EBWOP: I see xReck still hasn't bothered to answer the one single question I posed to him.

[Locke Lamora]

Vi: 'interesting' for me generally means I find something that's worth noting but I haven't decided what to make of it. I wasn't sure precisely what the point of the comment was or what your motivation was for posting it. I also thought it was a little out of place - you go on the attack against Zach, hohum and ekiM, but flinter gets addressed in a much more neutral way that suggests a mild town read. I see you've now somewhat revised your view of flinter based on a previous game, so where did the rationale for your previous flinter statement come from if not meta?

Kyle: so you think voting 'every which way' is scummy, or is there something about the way Zach specifically is doing it? Have you seen Reckoner get wagoned on D1 in your previous games with him?

[flinter]

I think I know what you mean, VI. The difference was that there, pretty early (I checked, with my fourth post), I got the idea that xscorp was scum (because he had played different in another game I had played with him, as town) That was my first vote there.

Percy: I would have voted if I thought that action made Reck more likely scum.

Sotty: I would try to explain it. I don't like people thinking badly about me, and such things are better explained then left there. I think I'm going to try to play more like Ekim this game, although I fear I wouldn't be so objective when I tried to find out the motive of someone making a ridiculous point against me.

[Percy]

Regarding post restrictions: I'm not convinced it's a post restriction. I think people who are jumping on Vi and

demanding

that she

explain herself

seem to be both (1) opportunistic and (2) paranoid.

Also, how would you have preferred I acted in response to hohum's post if you apparently found my reaction scummy?

I don't know why you concluded that it was a post restriction. Some reasoning and/or conclusions based on this stance of yours would have been nice.

Still, I re-read you in ISO, and I find myself with a townish read, simply because in most other cases you explain yourself well, and I think it speaks to townie motivations.

Percy: I would have voted if I thought that action made Reck more likely scum.

I understand that. What I'm asking is why you've dismissed the case on xRx, even though it's more than just "voting for votehopping", which in and of itself you seem to suggest is "not great" and potentially "setting someone up".

[Percy]

Also, I would like flinter to answer her own question and tell us who she suspects, if anyone. Last time I checked, she suspected nobody, and she still hasn't voted.

[flinter]

I just answered, percy

and the only person who worries me is Kyle. In the previous games I quite soon thought him town, but here his play... worries me (I can't say it better), but I want to see more of his posts before I'll tell you (and him) what my problem is.

Other then that, I really have no idea yet.

[hohum]

Regarding post restrictions: I'm not convinced it's a post restriction. I think people who are jumping on Vi and

demanding

that she

explain herself

seem to be both (1) opportunistic and (2) paranoid.

Wrong. It's a piece of information which may or may not be useful to the town and it isn't up to you to decide that for us.

I don't remember demanding an answer from Vi. I remember asking a simple question and your reaction to that is far more telling than her non-answer. Strawman much?

I don't like hohum's play so far. Sound and fury, signifying nothing, excused with belligerent "I'll pressure who I want!". I find it scummy. If he has played like this before as town, I'd appreciate a link.

It's my vote. The vote belongs to me, not you. I'll use it in accordance with my ownership of it. If you have a problem with that, then too bad.

[kyle99]

I've played with xReck before, and he always plays like this, which is why I'm not sure he's scum. I will admit some of his playing so far this game is quite scummy though. I can't remember seeing xReck wagoned like this so early either.

I don't have any definite reasons for why Zack is scum, and I'm not even convinced of it myself yet. Swinging around your vote, especially in the beginning, isn't terribly scummy, I just don't have any other leads.

[Vi]

I see you've now somewhat revised your view of flinter based on a previous game, so where did the rationale for your previous flinter statement come from if not meta?

flinter is obviously a calmposter. I've seen this from her in MD, and it's pretty obvious just from her overall posting tone. Which is why when I looked at flinter's scum - or Town - or something - game, I was surprised to see that she was acting more or less NOT like what I've seen ITT. Given that (apparently) she was trying to be Town in the linked game, and here she's acting much more cautiously (to the point of being almost entirely noncommittal), I had to balk. Plus I think she likes antagonizing me, so I'm more or less done liking her on a personal level.

I do agree with her opinion on xRx at least; it's just a shame that that's half of her stances from post one.

---

"hohum Posts To Defend Self; Avoids Other Topics Of Conversation", end quote.

---

Regarding post restrictions: I'm not convinced it's a post restriction. I think people who are jumping on Vi and demanding that she explain herself seem to be both (1) opportunistic and (2) paranoid.

But is it scummy?

---

I just don't have any other leads.

"Subject Not Trying To Scumhunt Yet Perfectly Fine With That", end quote.

[flinter]

Plus I think she likes antagonizing me, so I'm more or less done liking her on a personal level.

I hope you aren't serious here If you were, I would like you to know I didn't intent to. Sorry.

I do agree with her opinion on xRx at least; it's just a shame that that's half of her stances from post one.

that is a start


Now, the promised post about Kyle, seen that he has made another post that has as only point the meta-defense of Reck.

I have never seen Kyle do that before. As I know kyle, he is not a leader in town, and you'll generally see kyle agreeing with one or the other. Taking a stance against a bandwagon is not something kyle does often. I have never seen him do it, and if he did it, I would expect him to follow someone else who would have a good reasoning. There is no good reasoning in his defense. "I will admit some of his playing so far this game is quite scummy" would normally be all kyle would need to get on that bandwagon.

Further, the kyle I know, gets into trouble in the early game quite often (bandwagonning is one of the things he gets into trouble with, and also the weak explanation of his votes), as he plays "risky". Nothing of that here. I think this is because kyle is scum:

vote kyle

(I have nothing against your playstyle btw, if this would make it seem so)

[kyle99]

Plus I think she likes antagonizing me, so I'm more or less done liking her on a personal level.

I hope you aren't serious here If you were, I would like you to know I didn't intent to. Sorry.

I do agree with her opinion on xRx at least; it's just a shame that that's half of her stances from post one.

that is a start


Now, the promised post about Kyle, seen that he has made another post that has as only point the meta-defense of Reck.

I have never seen Kyle do that before. As I know kyle, he is not a leader in town, and you'll generally see kyle agreeing with one or the other. Taking a stance against a bandwagon is not something kyle does often. I have never seen him do it, and if he did it, I would expect him to follow someone else who would have a good reasoning. There is no good reasoning in his defense. "I will admit some of his playing so far this game is quite scummy" would normally be all kyle would need to get on that bandwagon.

Further, the kyle I know, gets into trouble in the early game quite often (bandwagonning is one of the things he gets into trouble with, and also the weak explanation of his votes), as he plays "risky". Nothing of that here. I think this is because kyle is scum:

vote kyle

(I have nothing against your playstyle btw, if this would make it seem so)

So me not bandwagoning and defending a baseless bandwagon is scummy? I'm simply saying that xReck's current playstyle fits his meta quite well, not that I'm completely assured of his towness. Your post basically reads, "Kyle is taking a stand, something I've never seen him do, so I think he's scum." No offense, but that's some pretty weak reasoning.

[Percy]

@hohum

:

I don't remember demanding an answer from Vi. I remember asking a simple question and your reaction to that is far more telling than her non-answer. Strawman much?

Well, that's certainly how I read this:

It's a fair question and if he is under a post restriction

we have the right to know about it.

(emphasis mine)
Also, she did answer:

This is not a post restriction (certainly not an objective one), and I don't think hohum asking about it is pro-Town when there are certainly better things he could be asking about.

My personal take on theme games is that the scum

usually

don't know a lot about how the game works, about the same amount as the town, but that they can use such knowledge more effectively if it's discussed openly. This may be inaccurate, but it's certainly how I design my games.
Even if this isn't true, but especially if it is, I prefer to keep the focus on reads, reasons and opinions than trying to prise information out of the setup. An early focus on setup in theme games is at the best anti-town, imo.
An important caveat is that focus on setup should occur, but it's best left until endgame. That way, inconsistencies emerge more naturally as the setup hasn't been continually discussed over the course of the game.
So yeah, I have a problem with it, and I guess that is "too bad". It's more along the lines of a playstyle criticism/theorycrafting right now, but I can see early signs of scumminess in approaches like hohum's.

@Vi

: I think it is the weakest of scumtells, but I'm not going to discount it.

As for kyle, his (1) weak agreement with xRx's vote, (2) weak attack of xRx's bandwagon and (3) no other substantive contributions is noted.

FoS: kyle99

.

[ortolan]

kyle got mislynched on day one in roccisi winter as town doc (along with a whole bunch of other policy lynches), mainly for lurking and being noncommittal if memory serves. I don't see the difference to how he is playing here. flinter's case is basically "kyle usually plays like a sheep and because he's not doing so here he is likely to be scum". Sure it's uncharitable but I also can't shake the feeling flinter is just coming up with a convoluted excuse to vote someone who she thinks is an easy target (and conveniently avoid more populous/viable bandwagons).

Unvote
Vote: flinter

[flinter]

ortolan, I usually think Kyle town. I don't have that here.

and a town needs leaders and followers, kyle is more a following type: there is nothing wrong with that, as long as he is helping as town. And staying of the major bandwagons is quite logical, since I don't like the case on Reck, and Ekim is actually trying to answer and ask questions.