Kingmaker II-Game Over

[VitaminR]

Will read the thread and post content soon.

[VitaminR]

VitaminR: Please execute. There is something wrong with this role. Without looking at votes or discussions or anything, this is the most cursed role there is out there. I find it non-coincidental that immediately after replacing in, both DoS and VitaminR have promised to do re-reads and have started lurking immediately therafter. I do not think anymore that reading the entire thread is necessary and I think it's more likely that this is indicative of someone replacing into a scum role and wondering how the hell he's going to get out of this. Anyway, it'd make it easier on everyone to execute a recent replacement anyway. And Phoebus wasn't exactly the epitome of pro-towniness in this game either. I see it as a win-win situation. I can only see a detriment if VitaminR comes back soon as starts asking really good questions and showing a lot of interest in just trying to do something other than lurking defensively - instead of lurking neutrally.

Right... to be honest, I've been incredibly busy. I thought I'd have the time to read the thread quickly, but uni did not cooperate.

I was not even really aware I was that much of a suspect.

I'll have a quick look at recent posts now, so I don't hold up the game.

[VitaminR]

Okay. The case against me is based on lurking. I replaced into this game knowing there's a lot to read and I intend to keep up my end.

As for the current execution list, I have a slight scum vibe off Dead Rikimaru listed (he was trying to make too much out of pablito and Glork's jokey actions around page 2, I thought), but I haven't got anywhere near far enough into the thread to comment.

I have my afternoon off tomorrow. I will finish reading then.

[VitaminR]

Reading now. At page 16, I have a strong feeling SV and PJ are scum. Pablito I think is town. MoS too.

I'll keep reading, though.

[VitaminR]

One of RafK and KaleiÐoscøpe is scum. There was no real suspicion on Pooky, except for Glork's late Day 1 vote, but when Glork was made king, both jumped on the wagon very easily and quickly.

[VitaminR]

PJ did that too, actually.

Fritz is suspicious too. For the first 35 pages (this is where I'm up to now) all he did was push for CTD without giving reasons and call Pooky a good guy and his scum buddy.

Zindie is pro-town.

[VitaminR]

[quote="Cogito Ergo Sum"]VitaminR: Yes. He should always be executed.
[/quote]
FINE. Write your own flavour.

Finished reading.

Decided Fritz is probably pro-town, he actually started playing the game. Now undecided on PJ. I think his day 1 play wasn't good at all. He did not seem to have many suspicions and I don't think he had that much reason to end up executing Rosso. There were some good things in there too, though, so I'm not sure yet.

My votes:

Vote: spectrumvoid,
Vote: RafK,
Vote: KaleiÐoscøpe

On the List of Execution:
MoS: Nope. Town.
VitaminR: Nope. I think he may be town too.
SV: Yes.
Smashy: Leaning towards no.

[VitaminR]

way to post 5 times in a row vitamin^

who are you?
me?

No, then they would have all been one-liners.

Pablito, I don't have any questions for you. I think your play has been consistent and pro-town.

[VitaminR]

In my first post, now I reread it, my suspicions of him are fairly unjustified. I think killing him would be an easy way out for a scum king.

I agree with this. I'm liking Shanba's posts.

[VitaminR]

I'd like to hear from Yos.

[VitaminR]

Yos, I don't think you should be ignoring SV, especially considering the amount of players who approve of her possible execution.

[VitaminR]

I did vote her, but you're right, I never outlined my reasons.

She was the player who had the most negative mentions in the notes of my re-read.

I'll try to explain all the entries.

spectrumvoid:
- "Giving up is a scum-tell"
She said this cardb0ardb0x early Day 1, voting him as well. Horrible reason.

- Awful Phoebus vote for playing by gut
She voted Phoebus just after one of his first posts (I think) because he based his votes on gut. Another bad and very easy reason to vote someone.

- jumping on the pablito wagon
I think this pertains to the pablito wagon Day 1, based on the deviations from his normal style of play, which I didn't like at all. The fact that pablito defended Glork was in no way suspicious to me and jumping on it reminded me strongly of the two notes cited above.

- Glork vote for a mispresentation (not enough that late in the game)
Glork misinterpreted someone's posts as King. I didn't think it was enough to base a vote on.

- subtly criticises LL for finding a lot of people pro-town
Voting LL because of his "townie tells" is scummy. Fits with the pattern of the above.

- Bad Glork vote
She voted Glork for executing Pooky. Basically.

- Attacks LL for supporting Pooky when his support came very late and was pretty pro-townish
LL defends all the people he assigns "townie tells" to and he pretty much changed his mind about Pooky very late and very obviously. That would be incredibly stupid for scum. Attacking him for that is another easy vote and takes the facts at face value without looking into the intent behind them. At a point where a Pooky execution seems likely, it is counterproductive for scum to defend him.

- "joining in the mutiny"
A DR vote. Following the crowd, which is, again, very convenient.

There's a pretty clear pattern there of not giving her own reasoning nor attempting to construct her own arguments or her own sense of who might be scum.

[VitaminR]

I'm going to assume nothing I've posted is part of the reason why I am on the LoE, and I'll just look at Phoebus.

Phoebus is very much a gut player, who doesn't really care how others want him to post. If he thinks someone is scummy, he'll point it out. I think that exactly because the players he voted on gut initially were exactly the people on the major bandwagons, it should be clear that it was sincere. Scum would be more cautious.

(I know that's WIFOMish, but, well, WIFOM rocks.)

As for the lurking, that's not a reliable indicator of scumminess.

That last statement also holds for DragonsofSummer, who I can't really say much more about, because I haven't played with him.

[VitaminR]

1) The 2 tells I made early day 1 were just the usual early day 1 nonsense.

Day 1 was pretty long and that doesn't mean you escape responsibility or that what you did can't have served a scummy purpose.

2) LL: Think I've said something about this before. I thought LL was scummy because of the weird townie playstyle. I have since changed my opinion due to LL's title, and due to meta-gaming reasons. I then dropped LL completely.

Even without the metagame reasoning, the assumption that someone is scum for a playstyle like LL is suspicious. It's irrational and strange, yes, but it has no use for scum. It's the irrationality = scummy fallacy.

a. I thought Glork was scum. Naturally, I thought those who were defending him were scum. (pab)

Firstly, I would dispute that "naturally." You still need reasoning. Secondly, pablito's defense of Glork was in the first few pages. What makes this serious and your behaviour "Day 1 nonsense"?

b. I did not think Glork was scum for executing Pooky, I thought Glork was scum for going after Yos with no reasons.

You don't think Glork executing Pooky was a good sign? Or the fact that he went after Pooky in pretty much the same manner in which he went after Yos?

4) Joining in the mutiny. Duh. Who wants an inactive king?

He's scum because you don't want an inactive king?

Explain that logic to me.

Yos, I would really appreciate a SV execution.

[VitaminR]

Yos, you asked for the case against SV. What did you think of it and her response to it?

[VitaminR]

I do agree with that. Individually, the points aren't that convincing.

It's a pattern, though, and not a lot of what she's posted has fallen outside of it.

[VitaminR]

PJ, your post is long and you seem fairly definitive, but this was the only thing in there that touches on my behaviour and it seems fairly trivial:

Is there a reason Dead Rikimaru (now Smashy, now Battle Mage) changes here?

To be honest, this strikes me as being very similar to VitaminR's entrance into Space Monkeys, where he begins upon first entering the game by saying (very watered down) "I think Glork is scummy", and later changes fairly quickly "I think Glork is town" when he decides he 'no longer likes the case against Glork', or some such thing. Note that both Glork and VitaminR were the final scum in that game. I would like to see an explanation for this one. .

1) The first comment was a quick one because I wasn't sure how long my reading would take. I put the page number there to illustrate that I wasn't that far into the thread yet. Also, a page 2 thing is fairly insignificant in such a big thread.
2) My stance changed because my opinion changed after reading the thread completely. There is a pretty significant difference between Space Monkey and this game. In that game, my opinion 'changed' in discussion. Here, it changed independently.Also, initially, in Space Monkey, I took a different stance. I said we needed to debate the situation more. I later took the "Glork is scummy"-angle a bit as to not be too obvious. I wasn't sure whether or not Glork's gambit would work and I didn't want to blow all our chances with it.
3) That was an endgame situation, not comparable.
4) MoS is town. I never stated anything in terms that absolute in Space Monkey. In fact, I was incredibly wishy-washy.

Is that satisfactory?

[VitaminR]

PJ, what I mostly meant was that you seem to pick out a rather small part of my posts so far to consider. What is scummy you discuss and what may be pro-town falls into the "you haven't posted much"-category.

In Space Monkey and in this game, I'm replacing people who have barely posted. I can't really address cases that are mostly based on their absence.

I'll try to write out my notes on DR later tonight. For now, I have work to do.

[VitaminR]

Again, I will point out:

...you don't have much behavior on which to touch on, so this wording strikes me as overly dismissive.

True, and I'll try to address your points fairly.

1.) Post 1829, you mention Dead Rikimaru off-hand as an early-game suspicion.
2.) Post 1830, you mention a few people you think are town/scum, but with absolutely no reasoning (read: nothing

I

can comment on).
3.) Post 1831, you are calling people who found Pooky suspicious on D2 suspicious.
4.) Post 1832, you further this line of thought. You again call somebody pro-town with no reasoning whatsoever.

Note

: I also find it silly how anybody who started poking at Pooky on D2 suspicious. I'm not sure what you expect - what would you have thought if

nobody

picked up on the Pooky suspicion? Though I cannot speak for others, I didn't poke at Pooky until D2 because I didn't find him overly

suspicious

until D2.

I just found it strange how a number of people suddenly came out with Pooky votes very easily when Glork is pretty much alone in his suspicions Day 1.

5.) Post 1837, again a post with very little reasoning, even though it is accompanied with three votes.

Yeah, those are mostly placeholders. I intended to outline the notes I have on them, but with such a big thread, that takes a while to do...

For now, they are mostly there for others to see where my opinions are at the moment.

And since I am

also

suspicious of SV, I wasn't going to start poking you about that. Given what little you have actually talked about

besides that

in the game, I'm afraid I don't understand how else I'm supposed to do anything but "pick out a rather small part of my posts so far to consider". Fact is, there isn't much to consider in your posts as they are currently, so I figured I'd start by asking about your change in opinion on DR/Smashy. It will be possible for me to have more pointed questions once you start giving explanations.

Fair enough.

DR/Smashy:

- he tried to make too much out of the pablito/Glork interaction page 2
This is the only negative thing I have listed.

- seems genuinely lost
Yes, he was a very absent king, but lurking does not equate scumminess. He seemed swamped and pretty lost as a king, trying but not really sure enough to take responsibility.

I think it would have been much easier for scum to fake certainty (you can just pick the player people find most suspicious). His behaviour matches what I'd expect for someone who doesn't want to go down as a bad king and doesn't know what choice to make in order to avoid that.

- very quick wagon
Also, the case on him built up so fast and on so little that I think scum involvement is pretty likely.

All in all, I wouldn't want to clear him for being lost as a king, but I do think it is all the case against him is supported by. He hasn't really done anything significantly scummy.

[VitaminR]

Yos, I've been re-reading (because I'm pretty unhappy about being on the LoE) and I have to say I don't think your position is warranted.

Phoebus may have been your main suspect throughout the game, but you have to realise he only has

seventeen

posts. In contrast, you have over a hundred. I really think you're being premature in drawing conclusions.

With 78 pages of content, your case against someone should consist of more than "he wagoned, wagoning is scummy."

[VitaminR]

True, this is what you put forth as your case:

VitimanR: As you can see from some of my other posts, Phoebus was my main supect for a big part of the game. Not just because of lurking; the posts Phoebus did make seem quite scummy; he was just following the crowd with his votes, generally refusing to say anything useful or give any specific reasons for the few votes he did make, lurking, promising to post more and then not following through, and making excuses for lurking. DOS didn't really say much of anything, and nothng VitimanR has done yet has changed my mind yet about that role.

This comes down to wagoning and lurking.

Which is absurd; I'm not going to be LESS suspicious of someone BECAUSE they were lurking and didn't contribute a whole lot.

This does not follow from:

You seem to be suggesting that it's not fair to attack Phoubus because he only had 17 posts and didn't contribute a whole lot.

What I am suggesting is that it is unfair to attack someone on the basis of wagoning when there is very little material to judge them on, specifically because the two are related factors.

It's primarily a scarcity of evidence issue, but what makes your case even more problematic is that non-activity is an important cause of opportunism in voting.

I think that the fact that I have more posts than Phoebus had speaks for itself.

[VitaminR]

Explanation for my votes:

RafK

As Mert:
- Too much discussion of mechanics
He discussed game mechanics rather heavily Day 1 without going into suspicions.

- poking for opinions without giving opinions
He then started asking direct questions about people's suspicions, still without giving his own.

- bad votes when he does vote
The votes he did cast was very easy. I seem to remember he voted Phoebus for the gut play, among other things. I have to admit my memory is a bit hazy on this one.

- complaining about "woe is me" votes
No idea what this means... I'll have to go back and find that.

- implying a Phoebus/MoS "tag-team" (explanation is good, though)
He explained this.

As RafK:

- Easy Pooky Vote
Voted Pooky rather easily.

- CES vote has no content

[VitaminR]

KaleiÐoscøpe

- Easy Pooky Vote
- Easy Yos Vote (both following Glork expressing suspicion)
This is mostly why I found him suspicious. I didn't like this. He seemed to follow Glork rather obediently.

- response to LL's suspicions reads like I would respond as scum
I'll have to dig this out, can't remember the post at the moment.

- "I would vote myself if I didn't know I was town"
Thought this was a scummy thing to say.

[VitaminR]

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"]To respond to your suspicion: I've voted pooky because it was almost the end of the day and there were two prime suspects at that moment (IIRC) and Glork was about to "Glork" someone. I choose the person I would rather see dead at that point: the one who advocated a quick hammer on my previous alignment card which I know to be town.[/quote]
I don't think this is true...

I'll go have a look.

[VitaminR]

Vote: Pooky

I did not like how he was willing to execute me extemely quickly, and the way he jumped on my bandwagon was vey suspicious.

Though currently I'm leaning towards MBL being town, though his scumdar is way off; as he hasn't acted much like a scum going for a easy lynch.

Here's why, that was bird. Same thing goes for the Yos vote quickly after.

Also dug out the LL thing:

LuckayLuck, I'm not entirely sure why you find me suspicious; as far as I can tell its because you dissagree with much of my Post 535; and because I didn't like someone's inactivity (you put my name there, but that's obviously a mistake). Could you correct me where I'm mistaken/add anything I missed so I can defend myself properly against your accusations?

There was something about this that struck me as off. The friendly, helpful tone is what I would use towards someone like LL as scum. LL is quick to join someone's side and adopting that attitude towards him makes it easier to skew his perception.

- complaining about "woe is me" votes
No idea what this means... I'll have to go back and find that.

This referred to Mert alleging that cbb was scummy for going "woe is me," which I think is easy justification for voting someone under attack.

[VitaminR]

Well, I tend to think Bird was probably pro-town, because one major scum tell that we caught Pooky with was the oppurtunistic jump onto the Bird wagon during the pages lost in the crash.

Oh? Could you elaborate on this?

I hadn't replaced in yet when Pooky was executed, so I'm naturally a bit questioning of the rigour of any argument that specifically separates into "as Mert" and "as RafK" but then puts Mert stuff under me (FWIW, though, as said above, I don't think people voting Pooky on the whole are scummy- quite the reverse. I'm sure a couple of scum got in on the action, but to imply that people who voted Pooky easily are scum is just weird. It's like the people attacking Glork for executing Pooky on the suspicion of bussing... it's just paranoia. It's something to keep in mind if the person's behaviour is otherwise scummy, but it's not a first assumption).

The separation matters little, that's just the haziness of my notes.

I don't think people voting Pooky were scummy for voting Pooky, but there did seem to be a scramble towards suspecting him the moment it became clear he was a possible execution.

So, if I say something that obveously true, that makes it a scumtell?

I don't think that was his point, just the fact that it is so obviously scummy it becomes a bit of a null tell. It's comparable to saying "I want all townies dead!"

Phoebus's "execute anyone" comments seemed to be an excuse to not comment on any specific people, and that IS a scumtell, as scum often don't like to pick fights and risk making connections.

"Seemed to be?" Where's your evidence for this?

Also, in a huge game like this, couldn't a townie who hasn't been participating conceivably behave in the same way?

[VitaminR]

[quote="Yosarian2"]There was a very rapid bandwagon on him that got quite a few votes for very little reason, mostly based on that silly "nutkicked" theory, which was lost during the crash. Several people jumped on the wagon, including very oppurtunistic voted from Phoebus, Twomz, and Pooky. I believe that was one of the reasons Glork ended up executing Pooky that day. And that makes me tend to think Bird was probably town, if Pooky was trying to push for a Bird lynch with bad reasons.[/quote]
Interesting.

Unvote: KaleiÐoscøpe

[quote="Yosarian2"]I was asking that everyone comment on Glork's LOE, and say who they would lynch, and he responded with "just kill anyone, I don't care" rather then giving any actual analysis.[/quote]
Fair enough.

[VitaminR]

Yos, any chance of an indication of what direction we're heading in?

I'd like to hear from SV concerning PJ's post.

[VitaminR]

I am here. Not particularly enthused by a mnowax lynch. He mostly seems incompetent, but not too scummy.

I still think you should kill SV, especially considering the consensus.

[VitaminR]

Methinks RafK is mnowax's scumbuddy, or just completely unobservant. Yosarian was not at all responsible for mnowax's jump to the forefront, I was the one that pointed out how scummy he was, and mnowax did all the work for me.

Meh, I do think there is some truth in what RafK said. Yos hasn't been very open about his thought processes. The way he slowly let go of me as a suspect without really commenting on it is somewhat reminiscent of scum realising they can't get away with the execution they want.

[VitaminR]

So now I'm scummy for NOT killing you?

Erm... no?

And what do you mean "can't get away with it?" A large part of the town agreed with you being a good lynch. If I had killed you weeks ago no one would have been surprised, and I doubt it would have changed anyone's opinion of me no matter what your alignment is.

Actually, there was a reasonable amount of resistance. Your second point is a good one, though.

In any case, I think I have made it clear why you're now in my second tear of suspects; I pointed out early on today that the logical way you made the case against SV looked somewhat pro-town to me, even if I didn't agree with it. The way you've made cases in general today, your high level of activity, and the vibe I'm getting from your posts today all look somewhat pro-town to me. It hasn't made up for Phoebus's behavior, quite, but it makes you less scummy in my eyes then some other people look to me.

Fair enough.

It just somewhat surprised me to learn I'd been almost discounted as an execution candidate. Trying to keep the possibility open seemed like something scum would do.

[VitaminR]

Vote: spectrumvoid

I like RafK's recent posts, even if I do agree with some of Yos' objections. I'm not entirely pleased with how we got to an execution yesterday.

FOS: Yosarian2

[VitaminR]

I'd been out of touch for a while. I forgot most of my more minor suspicions. Mert, now RafK, I like, as I said earlier. Phoebus is now VitaminR, who, now I stop to think about it, could be reminding me of his play in Space Monkeys, replacing for Nightson.

How?

Here, but too exhausted to read the posts I need to go through at the moment.

[VitaminR]

Dead Rikimaru/Smashy/BM/mnowax: He still strikes me as town. As I've said, his helplessness as king seemed more sincere than scummy.

PJ: I don't trust PJ in this game. I disagree with his analysis. In general, I think the people he's suspicious of are pro-town and his Day 1 foray into kingdom led to a bad execution. Also don't like his Pooky switch. As a matter of fact,

Vote: petroleumjelly

.

Pablito: Pablito struck me as town. Very prolific and opinionated. I also like Thesp's contributions.

MoS: I think MoS is town. Too opinionated and deliberate in how unhelpful he can be.

Kscope: My suspicions of him were mostly based on the actions of Mert. Kscope himself hasn't done much to rattle my scumdar.

RafK: I like RafK's recent posts and I agree with a lot of his analysis. I still think one of these could easily be scum, based on the Pooky votes of their predecessors, but I couldn't really point at which one.

Fritzler: I think Fritz is pro-town, but I find him difficult to judge as a player.

[VitaminR]

I don't see the too scummy to be scum theory as a fallacy. I'll specify what I disagree with in PJ's posts. I did say "in general." I am still suspicious of you. DR's seeming inability to analyse the game is what I was referrring to with "helplessness."

[VitaminR]

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"]Who's Mert?[/quote]
Confused predecessors, sorry.

[quote="Mastermind of Sin"]Why do you think Fritzler is protown, VitaminR?[/quote]
He has made a couple of uncharacteristic attempts to seriously contribute. He also joked a lot about being Pooky's scumbuddy, which seems too obvious for a real scumbuddy.

PJ, I discounted myself. That leaves mnowax, spectrumvoid and Battle Mage as the people you were suspicious of in your analysis. 2 out of 3 doesn't seem unfair.

Also, give me a bit of time to indicate exactly what I disagree with in your analysis. You really post a lot.

On DR: It is exactly the fact that he had the time and the power, yet did absolutely nothing that makes him seem helpless. He had so many chances to comment, to do more than he did, that I think it was genuine.

[VitaminR]

If you're going to say "I think mnowax1 (from yesterday) is town and PJ's analysis is wrong", you're being rather unfair - he has already been executed and shown to be town. You're free to point to where you don't agree in my analysis (there is undoubtedly things which are clearly wrong, since he was town), but saying "you think mnowax1 is town" is not saying much of anything. Hence, you really

are

only saying "I think 1/2 of PJ's suspicions is wrong".

Well, obviously I'm not voting you for disagreeing with your conclusions (being wrong is not that scummy). It's the analysis that's important. I will get to that.

I don't know, it was an impression that was formed yesterday, but I didn't have the time to outline a case and I know that expressing any sort of suspicion of you leads to this kind of nitpicking that just drags on and on.

[VitaminR]

The first one. I'll come to the other ones later.

Okey doke. DR starts off the game very slowly, but by trying to draw a connection between Glork and Pablito. I remember a few people saying this made him look 'town', but I never really understood those sentiments – drawing connections is easy to do, and the fact that he labels the distancing technique as 'extreme' seems to indicate he knows it will be seen as unlikely, but thought he would throw it out there anyways. Slightly scummier than townie, so far as I'm concerned, but not a big indicator either way.

I had this in my notes too, actually. I agree with this.

DR constantly talks about how little time he has, and does things like *fainting* at 39 pages without offering commentary. Lazy/preoccupied at best, scummy at worst.

Laziness = scumminess fallacy. I don't see how it is a reliable indicator of alignment.

And then (I believe) he is made King – where he begins by stating he 'has a strategy', and saying the town should discuss while he's away. At this point, I can't tell if DR was just

really

busy, or if he was thinking "Oh jeez, I better make it sound like what I'm doing – I'll just post as little as often until I can think of something to do". I actually don't think his "everybody list their top 3 scum suspects" was all

too

bad of an idea, though he clearly should have been more attentive to the game to make sure this was actually going to happen.

Inactivity = scumminess fallacy. Same.

Neutral points for his resistance to lynching lurkers – I was originally going to give him slight pro-town points for this, but on reflection, it could be just as easy for this to have been a way to subtly push forcing his execution onto a scum-buddy. If this role dies, I will want to take a more critical look at the following players, since these were the lurkers in question:

{RafK [Mert], Cogito Ergo Sum [Samus/Twomz], Mnowax [CrashTextDummie], Der Hammer [Vaughn], Shanba [Nightfall/Ubertimmy], VitaminR [DragonsofSummer/Phoebus]}

You're setting yourself up to draw some big conclusions from something really minor here.

DR asks a few direct questions in very short posts for a while, which I suppose shows he was paying some attention, but on the other hand, it makes me wonder why he didn't really bother to comment on much himself. His 'strategy' seems very self-serving.

When he lists the "top 3" for all the players who participated, he doesn't really go into asking questions (which is something he seemed to infer he would be doing for much of the day).

... and DR keeps talking about how he doesn't have time, coworkers fired, he has a plan, etc etc. He makes a "map" in his Post 32. Impressive compilation, but I honestly don't care for it if he's not going to make

comments

on it. Anybody could summarize a game – what I would rather have seen were some actual opinions. The feeling I'm getting is that he kept asking others' for their opinions without actually giving any of his own, which strikes me as entirely hypocritical and a good way to stay in the shadows while technically being in the "spotlight".

Self-serving = scumminess fallacy. Why could a pro-town player not want to stay in the shadows, for instance? Yes, participating is the pro-town thing to do, but for the individual player selfishness can be a lot more effective.

Very short comments on everybody else, so those are difficult to analyze for the moment without looking at context. He makes his list between LL and SV; which I find a little odd, given that his comment on SV was:

spectrumvoid: I don't find SV's lack of voting Pooky that scummy given her explaination, except that Glork did give reasons, so out that point goes. There's also been a couple of slips.

Very vague, no explanation of 'slips', no big reason for why she was on the LoE at all. Granted, I still would have liked for her to be executed, but his explanations leave something to be desired. I (obviously) did not agree with the LL execution.

I don't really get what's scummy here. Vagueness isn't really a reason and I'm not sure what you mean with the top paragraph..

So, overall. Dead Rikimaru's constant lurking (to the point where his posts weren't even about what he was thinking, but instead explaining why he wasn't posting) is more scummy than townish. His 'strategy' which allowed him to not need to take stances while having everybody else commit to thinks was more scummy than townie, and I'm not overly impressed with his Carnie act.

One big poor contribution = scumminess fallacy.

BM has very little I can relate with, since he mostly seems to be taking positions as he deems necessary without really explaining how he came to those positions.

This is fair.

I can easily see him as scum – I wouldn't mind seeing him executed whatsoever.

I disagree strongly. It feels like you're conveniently jumping on a less experienced player who found himself in a position where he couldn't handle the responsibility.

[VitaminR]

You certainly like to throw around the word "fallacy" a lot. A fallacy is drawing a conclusion which cannot be drawn from a set of premises. An informal fallacy often addresses something other than the actual argument being made (such as attacking the person [ad hominem], appealing to authority, etc).

I use the word fallacy a lot because I think a lot of your arguments fall under the same header (poor contribution = scummy). I know what a fallacy is.

Every scumtell is based purely on inductive reasoning. There is no sure-fire scumtell - but there are tells which make people more likely to be town, and more likely to be scum. People are also not going to agree that the same thing is a scumtell. What you are calling fallacies are not fallacies. I'll address each "fallacy" in turn.

Perhaps in the sense that no scumtell can truly be a fallacy, but it really does not logically follow that inactivity and laziness are scummy

unless

you assume that scum is more likely to exhibit that kind of behaviour. It is that claim which I would dispute and I don't think it's anywhere strong enough to hang your suspicions on to this extent.

1.) "Laziness = Scumminess fallacy". My post explicitly mentions how DR simply *faints* about there being 39 pages and leaving it at that. He makes one of his few appearances to the thread, and the best contribution he has is to faint. We call that active lurking. That is lazy

at best

or scummy

at worst

. It certainly doesn't

make

him scum, but it does increase the chances, so far as I'm concerned.

Addressed above.

2.) "Inactivity = Scumminess fallacy". Here I don't even believe you are fairly addressing my post. My point was that

as King

, he continually talked about "having a plan" and yet did not act on it. This looks like a prime example of stalling to me. I can accept that people at times cannot post as much as they would like, but he has no excuse for only coming by to say "I have a plan" and saying nothing of his suspicions.

Call it stalling = scumminess then. I still disagree.

3.) If somebody is a scumKing and

resistant

to executing lurkers, chances are at least one scum is going to turn out to be a lurker. If you want to dispute this one, be my guest, but I don't agree with you and I doubt many others would either.

And I actually think that is a fairly

small

conclusion, not a "large" conclusion. Saying at least 1 of 6 people are probably scum isn't exactly drastic.

Anything concerning alignment is a big conclusion, I feel. I don't dispute your first point. I just don't think that the chance is necessarily all that high. Executing a lurker could be equally undesirable because it puts a king in the spotlight more than a well-supported execution.

No,

no,

no

. When you are King, and entrusted with a day's execution, I don't give a flying flip if you "want to stay in the shadows". There is

no excuse

for somebody to be King, and for people to not know what they think. Especially when

he

is claiming to get everybody

else

giving opinions, he cannot sit idly by without sharing his

own

.

I agree, but there is a bit of a leap from this to his actions being an indicator of alignment.

This addresses MOS' post as well: I'm not trying to give DR a free pass. His contribution was terrible and he should be criticised for it. As far as I'm concerned, though, attacking him for it is a policy attack aimed at improving the standards of the game rather than aimed at catching scum.

5.) What I meant was that if you read Smashy's Post 3 into the game, his comments on other players are short - meaning it's difficult to tell where he would have gotten a basis for any of his positions. The point here was that he put SV on the list, but in his only paragraph in the game mentioning her, he lists two reasons. The first he throws out the window ("out that point goes" is what he says), and the second only says there were a "few slips", which is completely noncommittal and I have no clue what he is referring to in particular. This is something which could easily serve as a "fill-in-the-blank" reasoning, so that if he had executed SV, he could come up with his "justification" for it later. I do

not

like it when people are overly vague, and in my experience, being overly vague

is

a scumtell, and a very reliable one at that (although moreso reliable when it comes to vague role-claims).

I don't know, I'm pretty vague most of the time. Still, the point you're making is fair enough.

6.) "One Big Poor Contribution = Scumminess fallacy". You are mischaracterizing my post. When people try to make it look as if they are making a big contribution, when in fact they are saying nothing - that's a scumtell. DR's post looked

very

contributive, and helpful. But there was not a scrap of personal opinion in it. Those types of posts

are

scumtells in my opinion, and when it is compounded by the fact that DR also had not given much personal opinion throughout the course of the

entire game

, I certainly don't see this as an isolated incident (as is suggested by your specifying "one" big poor contribution), it is all the worse.

I don't think that is a scum tell. It's completely counterproductive, it just puts him in the spotlight.

I meant that as "one big 'poor contribution = scumminess' fallacy.'" I didn't mean to suggest it was an isolated incident.

[VitaminR]

The more the game is going on, the better I'm feeling about a Vitty-execution..

And... why?

[VitaminR]

VitaminR, what do you think of this analysis of Dead Rikimaru? This was made before he disappeared as king, so it has nothing to do with the lurking, etc. that PJ was talking about.

Dead Rikimaru:
Day 1 -
- Considers distancing tactic between pablito and Glork
- Claims that he didn't promote a pablito/Glork pairing, just that pablito is trying hard to be paired with pablito, can't think of a protown reason for it

I had this too.

Day 2 -
- votes pablito, no additional reasoning
- No post from Oct 27 until Dec 12, nothing of substance or length until Dec 18
- Doesn't find Yos scummy (good post)
- Claims to be unable to read Pooky, prefers him over Yos
- Amused that the LoE only contains those who have criticized Glork

Nothing considerably scummy here, except for perhaps the fourth one. Claiming to be unable to read your scumbuddy is something I would expect from scum.

Day 3 -
- Ask for top 3 suspects from each player
- Doesn't believe in randomly executing lurkers
- Calls for prods on lurkers
- Asks why Glork would bus a scumbuddy early in the game (My answer: Because he knows someone like you would ask yourself this question. Glork has admitted to being willing to bus any and all partners if he thinks it will get him a free pass through the game)
- States there are too many lurkers
- Asks me if my position on Phoebus is the same (I'll get to him eventually)

The lurker thing is somewhat scummy too, I'll grant you. He definitely seems overly concerned with them.

I think, on the whole, there are three clear scummy actions in your analysis that you could base a vote on, but I don't personally find them particularly convincing.

Thesp, to be fair, with the heat coming my way recently, I'm not sure if that 1 vote is still an accurate measure of general suspicion. I know TS and Yos definitely have me near the top of their lists, for one thing.

[VitaminR]

VitR- I could go for his head. His tactics are a little shady when it comes to defense

I only defended myself yesterday. Today, no one has actually specified what they find suspicious about me. All that has happened is that I stated suspicions of PJ, part of which included disagreeing with his analysis of someone, and then people disagreed with my disagreeing.

[VitaminR]

The day is drawing to a close (and I'll be asking for claims pretty soon), but that's about it.

Seriously? Could you at least tell me why I am on the LoE then?

[VitaminR]

Whoa... sorry, pj, not intended that way at all...

[VitaminR]

When

I

made my analysis on VitaminR (and the people he replaced),

his

response was this. He basically tries to trivialize the points against him as much as possible, and then says there are few comments about

him

in particular, to which I respond that that's because at that point in the game, VitaminR didn't have very many posts, so asking for a larger analysis on him in particular was rather undoable.

I really tried to address your points fairly there. I later conceded that asking for more analysis was a bit unfair. As a result, you asked me a few questions about my suspicions (I tried to answer them in full).

He completely dismisses everything against Phoebus/DoS.

I indicated that I can't really defend their actions, since they aren't mine. Nowhere have I stated that that invalidates them.

As for Space Monkeys, I felt you were largely voting me on gut. I thought that, as scum, my only hope was to try to make your case seem empty to others.

Coupled with his "disagreement" posts on DR - which he tries to overstate by using the word "fallacy" as many times as possible for things which are not fallacies - he has done nothing to make me want to keep him alive. He strikes me as a replacement for scum.

I admit that I may have overused the word "fallacy." I think my later post on that is more balanced. I can't really see how you can judge my opinion of DR, or you, on that, though. My argument does not hinge on the fact that you allegedly committed fallacies, but rather on the fact that I disagree with you because I see it that way.

I admit there may have been some frustration in my response to Zindaras, but he has ignored my earlier question of why I am on his LoE and it seems unfair of him to move on to asking for claims without addressing that.

[VitaminR]

I greatly prefer a SV execution at the moment, but that seems obvious.

I'd like to hear from Zindy.

[VitaminR]

I'd like Vitty and Voidybuns to claim. I'm getting to decision time.

...

[VitaminR]

I know I'm pretty much just giving you an excuse to execute me, but I really need more than just "CLAIM!!!111."

[VitaminR]

Right...

Well great.

I am a townie.

[VitaminR]

YARR!

[VitaminR]

2.) Post 2229 by spectrumvoid (followed by other posts) shows that SV favored killing Fritz over VitaminR. Noted.

In fact, I seem to recall SV openly argued I was pro-town.

Also, I am under the impression that VitR 'disagreed' with more than simply my analysis on DR, since I recall a phrase of something like "I disagree with most of your suspicions", which should be more than DR. VitR, please go into detail about what

else

you have disagreed with me about. I want it out in the open.

Yep, they were two more blocs of analysis I disagreed with. I'd sort of forgotten about them, to be honest.

[VitaminR]

PJ, the main problem I had with your pieces of analysis is that you didn't really have all that much evidence for the people you found scummy (SV, DR, mnowax and me). I've covered DR and me. Here is mnowax.

You summarised the two parts of your post, so I will quote those instead of responding to every bit.

Mnowax is striking me as somewhat scummy – I don't particularly like his level of participation, nor do I like his defeatist attitude and lack of substantive comments. His claimed suspicion on MoS seems a bit convenient in the sense that MoS is attacking him, and his first response seems to be reciprocation. His post explaining his vote on MoS, however, strikes me as legit. I'm actually fairly conflicted so far as his posts go.

Lack of contribution? Defeatist attitude? Those all strike me as "trying to find scum tells to fit what I want to do"-scum tells. Still, you're conflicted.

CTD's posts are in fact not really in accordance with what I would normally expect from him. I do know that in other games he was not posting as much as usual either, but in those games I am still fairly confident when he did post it was more substance than what he offered for much of this game. I don't feel like I can accurately comment on a number of his votes, because many of them were based on things lost in the crash, which I have forgotten much of by this point. I agree with others that his worst feature by far is his strange constant dismissal of Fritz, which I am going to have to label as slightly scummy to just plain scummy considering this was going on for well over 30 pages.

This is stretching somewhat. I don't see how not asking about what reasons someone has for voting you is a scum tell. Lack of substance is also not really a scum tell in my opinion, especially considering the size of this game.

Those were your reasons. I honestly expect something a whole lot more substantive than that from you.

Your case against SV was largely supported by her "fawning" tendencies and her Glork push. Now I agree with the last bit, but the first bit strikes me as somewhat contrived.

This is largely the problem I have with your posts. You seem to justify your suspicions with a lot of very minor things that you could really say about a lot of posters. Lurking, ignoring Fritz, "fawning," lack of substance. They're all things I think everyone does at points.

Btw, you posted this concerning SV:

Noting her Post 130 about VitR for later, but nothing much to read into at the moment – I disagree with most of her assessment regardless, though this should already be clear from my posting.

[VitaminR]

VitR, you're barking down the wrong path. It's not whether someone does one of those things, it's that someone does one or more of those things

consistently

, forming a pattern of behavior that you can pick up on to determine they are probably scum.

Definitely true, but I think that definitely as far as patterns of non-contribution are concerned, that determination should by no means be this strong.

[VitaminR]

Mainly RafK, Kaleidoscope and PJ who come out of that looking a bit scummy to me.

[VitaminR]

Too definitive, it doesn't ring true.

It's probably influenced strongly by the fact that I want him executed, though.

[VitaminR]

How about I address this in a roundabout fashion. Please show me a few examples of analysis in the game which had

more

"evidence" for somebody than one of my analyses. Games without true pro-town roles (such as Cop, Doc, Vig, etc) are inherently not going to have 'strong' evidence unless somebody is playing particularly bad.

There's plenty of analysis that goes beyond "lurking is scummy"-level analysis, but I agree that analysis will be shallower in a game like this (and I certainly don't mean to claim that your analyses are wholly superficial). I do get the impression that you could go a lot deeper with your analysis, but this is a large game with a lot of pages, I suppose.

2.) Lack of contribution/participation is something I put as 'at best, lazy town, at worst scummy', and this is consistent for me across the site (although this can change to being more scummy depending on the knowledge I have of the player). Defeatist attitude also tends to come more from scum, because

they

are the ones who is going to have the frame of mind "the jig is up", whereas a townsperson will

never

have that frame of mind. Townspeople pretty much give up when they are frustrated, often emotionally – and since that was not the case, it did not apply. Also, the defeatist attitude tell has worked in this game already: try reading over the Pooky-execution again. I'm not "trying to make up scumtells", I'm applying those which I already believe to be scumtells.

That is something we disagree on then. I find the lurker and defeatist tells to be so widely applicable that they're pretty meaningless. They build opportunistic cases, in my experience.

3.) Concerning CTD,

his

lack of contribution was worse than the average person's, and this is specifically because I am familiar with him. If you've ever played with CTD, he often presents a few clear cases against players – something which was very absent from this game. Seeing as this was an anomaly from his playstyle, it struck me as significant.

I really dislike the "lack of contribution"-metagame. Disinterest, especially in a large game, happens to a lot of different players.

4.) "Fawning" is the absolute best word I can come up for what SV was doing. I'm not blind, and I had an inkling of what SV was trying to do with me on D1. She was basically sucking up to me, and I think it's because she wanted a favor – i.e., to not be executed. She then did the same thing with Glork on D2. In fact, I'll read over for some examples, and then you can decide if my reasons are "contrived" or if

you

were just missing them.

Clearly,

b.

is the most significant, and I don't think "everybody has does

this

at points". This was out-and-out an attempt at flattery, from where I'm standing.

I admit I drew conclusions too quickly there. You have a point.

Jesus criminy. So now I'm not allowed to say I think somebody is scum in definitive terms? I've been suspicious of her since about Day 2; when she continually lives until D5, and I'm forced to think she's scum for what was probably about

six months

, my opinion tends to solidify. I've been wrong plenty of times in this game so far, but trying to say I'm "too sure" when I turn out to be right is just stupid.

That is a bit of selective quoting. I did point out that my gut reaction to it might have been coloured by my suspicion of you.

I'm certainly not basing any significant part of my suspicions on that reaction (nor the question above it, for that matter). My original points seem to have got somewhat buried.

What I mainly find difficult is your performance as king Day 1. It took you a very long time to form your suspicions (read like scum unsure of who to accuse) and I don't like the execution at all.

[VitaminR]

PJ, I can remember a number of games in which I've done scummaries (summaries of opinions), but that was the only real instance of me doing a summary. It was honestly more to do with losing track of the game. For all intents and purposes, I was trying to find scum. I didn't have to fake suspicions, because I didn't know who the scum were. That makes your points somewhat problematic.

Regardless of my personal behaviour, though, I really don't think you can attach that much weight to a tell without context. Even with potential statistical backing, there remains a great deal of individual variation. You cannot draw inferences about individual behaviour from population characteristics.

PJ, my point is this. A lack of commentary is scummy because it can be used to avoid attention. This advantage is nullified if the scum involved is the King. You're disregarding context. Similarly, lurking could be considered a tell, but in a large game with this many pages and this many lurkers, it shouldn't really be viewed as indicative of anything.

[VitaminR]

1.) Dead Rikimaru was clearly not contributing while he was King. His summarization made it seem as if he was making a very large contribution to the game whilst saying absolutely nothing. Everybody was

waiting

for him to do

something

, and instead of giving any of his own opinions he decided to post a giant post of fluff. And this was while he was continually trying to bait us along with his great plan, telling us to constantly just wait a little longer.

He was clearly not contributing, that is my point. That summarisation could not make it seem as if he was making a very large contribution, because it was too obvious that it was fluff.

2.) This particular scum-tell is not entirely relevant whether or not you are trying to find scum - it is indicative of somebody who feels they have to

look like they are contributing without actually doing so

. Your post does exactly that. MBF's did exactly that. And DR in this game certainly looks like exactly that. The context of people wanting DR to contribute

something

is what I am focusing on.

I don't see why that cannot apply to a townie as well. My point still stands, though. In this context, DR's post does not look like that. No one was fooled for a second, because his position was too conspicuous.

Basically so long as a fraction more 25% of the lurkers are scum, it still stands as a scumtell. It's by no means

definitive

, but it is definitely something

to take note of

.

Perhaps, but again, drawing strong inferences about individual behaviour from population characteristics is fallacious.

[VitaminR]

Mert

- First thing that strikes me as that his early posts (his first four real contributions) all discuss game mechanics.
- He then votes MOS, cbb and bird for what I think aren't really good reasons. His cbb vote is based on a bit of speculation concerning cbb's actions and his MOS vote is based on the fairly easy "he's not voting."
- Later votes cbb for a "woe is me"-attitude. Again, fairly easy.
- I don't much like his consequent switch to Phoebus for playing by gut. Mert seems to develop a pattern of voting players for not being perfect townies.
- His next posts are a series of explanations and I notice that he doesn't really mention other players.
- Then there is a post where he is voting Twomz and Pooky over the "nut-kicking"-incident. Wasn't there, still not sure what it was about.

Conclusion: primarily bad/easy votes and little initiative, but nothing that screams scum.

RafK

- He comes in with some clear opinions. Definitely looks pro-town on that first post.
- Gives a fairly detailed case on SV. In hindsight, it could be constructed. Let's see how he presents cases against other players.
- Hints at being suspicious of pablito, but doesn't get back to that later. Changing your mind like that is a slight pro-town point, because it suggests a lack of artifice in your suspicions.
- Votes Yos and CES. There's something to his case on Yos and CES.
- He confirm votes Yos and calls him a liar over something fairly minor. The heat is coming off his initial top suspect, SV, as well here. Slightly scummy.
- Picks up the SV case again, so the above conclusion may have been premature. I don't like his fairly wishy-washy comment towards LL just before he got executed.
- Says MOS, Phoebus and SV would make good lynches because a lot of people have opinions on them. Don't particularly like that argumentation.
- Rest of his posts don't contain much that is noteworthy.

Conclusion: Case against SV doesn't really say much either way in my view (it could have very well been constructed). I like the frequency of his contributions, but he does seem to have developed a tunnel-vision attitude with his fervour in chasing Yos. It is not really ringing true.

All in all, after this re-read (which I admit has sharpened my views somewhat), I wouldn't be dissatisfied with a RafK execution. There is nothing obviously pro-town in his or Mert's posts and a couple of scummy patterns.

[VitaminR]

Fritzler

- Calls Pooky a "good guy" and his "scumbuddy." Seems way too obvious.
- Pushes for a ctd execution to the point of stupidity.
- Votes Nightson, pulls some kind of Thor shtick in which he says Yos, SV and Kaleidoscope have to die
- Foses olio
- Votes everyone
- Unvotes Yos, says he would have executed MOS or Thadmiral
- Seems to want to kill TS.

Conclusion: Fritz is kinda all over the place, which I'd see him do as town sooner than I'd see him do it as scum. In any case, he's a bit of a non-influence on the town. The Pooky comments are the only things that speak against him and I don't think they're very convincing.

I would definitely prefer a RafK execution over a Fritzler one.

[VitaminR]

Mnowax is even more annoying and apathetic than me.

That's quite a feat.

vote: mnowax

That, as well as mnowax's MoS vote, is quite awful.

Vote: Toaster Strudel, mnowax

[VitaminR]

I'd like to know where PJ stands at this point.

[VitaminR]

I knew PJ was scum. His execution of me was so bad.

Congrats, scum, though! Well-played.

[VitaminR]

The thing is, unless you were more involved in the game, there was no way you were ever going to BE king. Dispite the fact that half the pro-town players suspected me at one point or another (I'm kind of proud and kind of surprised I managed to not get executed dispite having Glork, MOS, RafK, VitimanR, and most of the rest of the active pro-town players attacking me pretty agressivly at one time or another), I became king twice, just because I was somewhat active and trying, and no one who's not active and trying will ever be or should ever be made king. And I wasn't even all THAT active, by my normal standards.

I don't think I ever attacked you much. I did think you were scum at the end, though.

Somewhere during the day I replaced in, I made a promise to myself that I would execute PJ within a couple of posts if I were made king. I actually kept quiet about my suspicions of him for quite some time (I think I revealed it only when someone asked me about it directly) out of fear of not being considered a candidate for king because of it. I was certain he was scum.