433: Dry, bland, generic mafia: Game Over

[pete d]

Firstly, I think that superstring should reply to OtM's analysis before we add specific comments. I want to see his reaction / arguments.

Secondly, the analysis has swayed me a little in OtM's favour; I still need to reread through specifically gorckat and OtM and consider my previous suspicions, but on my scale it has put him back down on the same tier as gorckat and superstring for the moment.

As scum, I'd think you would have disincluded all the "NCN" posts and the protown vibe posts - you could have easily done so and been significantly more presuasive.

I'm not sure I agree with this. If he had done this, it would have been easy to check back over what he left out, and this may have worked against him. That said, I have experienced a completely BS analysis from a scum against me in another game, and OtM's analysis doesn't strike me as BS at all.

[Off the Mark]

However, the rest of your case against him seemed a bit circumstantial

Agreed that much of the case is circumstancial. Look at how many times I used the words "could be" and "might". With scum that are playing well, you're not usually going to get any better than circumstancial evidence, unless you get a cop investigation or something. And I think everyone left alive in this game is capable of playing well.

your argument seemed to give him credit for having a big, scheming plan that was trying to get into our heads with his posting. I seriously doubt that, if he's scum, he was trying to do anything more than pass his own reasons off as legitimate so that he could escape our suspicion.

Seriously disagree that I was trying to give him credit for a master plan. I was specifically showing his

in

consistencies, especially in regard to his views on Dodgy/CES and the Fonz.

I think he was just trying to make arguments that made it look like he was acting like a typical townie, while also trying to make "safe" accusations, and it led him to some conflicts which he needs to explain.

[gorckat]

For the record, guessing at what the scum will claim is probably the purest form of WIFOM.

well, of course.

im just guessing what scum would claim from my experience as scum.
of course, there are occasions where it is more beneficial to claim vanilla.
claiming a power role usually works best when there is a lot of confusion in the town, or when roles are not revealed upon death.

OTM left one post of his PBPA. In this one, string you state:

im just guessing what scum would claim from my experience as scum.

Links to games as scum please?

[Off the Mark]

^^^ I stopped at the end of Day 1, because I figured Day 2 was still fresh in our minds.

[gorckat]

Sorry- no accusation or finger pointing from me, OTM. (Unless you feel guilty, in which case, talk about it...you'll feel better ) Just saying I hadn't looked at that post along with all the others, and seeing it, want to see the games he's referring to.

[Off the Mark]

heh no guilt here, just wanted to explain that I didn't get lazy or anything

[Off the Mark]

la di da - since Superstring isn't posting, anyone else got comments?

[gorckat]

Yeah- I'm in the middle of moving. I'm checking in when I can, but might not be able to again until after Friday.

[Thestatusquo]

Prods coming soon.

[Dasquian]

Still here, working my way up to that reread (sorry). Also want to hear what superstring has to say.

Reaction to the PBPA: I hate PBPAs Generally I don't find them very useful, and in my experience tend to rehash someone's postings while saying "look, he could have said this as MAFIA!" Also, a PBPA war where the accused responds with a PBP-rebuttal is the most horrible thing in the world to read.

With that said, I think conclusions at the end are good - superstring has indeed been eager to press lurkers, the most glaring example being Dodgy/CES/MBL where he makes a reasoned post as to why we shouldn't lynch CES then comes back a few posts later saying we should, based only off of his lurking. It's possible he does have a major lurker hate, which I do think is good meta and good play in the absence of a better lead, but I'd have hoped for a little acknowledgement for his change of heart.

I also agree that a lot of his postings look a little forced; like pie says, these are somewhat circumstantial observations, which is a danger of PBPAs - finding the evidence you want to find. Does anyone who knows superstring's style think they stand out as particularly scummy

for him

?

[Off the Mark]

Sure thing, pie. I got nothing to hide:

For some reason, this line keeps sticking in my head whenever I think about this game and it gives me a bad feeling about gorckat. It sounds like something someone would say who was proud of his hard-to-detect-as-scum playing. Just a vibe, though, nothing solid. Maybe I should do a PBPA on Gorckat. Next time I have insomnia... (note the post time on superstring's PBPA)

[Pie_is_good]

I have to agree with OTM - that line kept coming up. It seems like an obvious enough scumtell that it immediately descends into a pseudo-wifom, but I've gotten that vibe in general from Gorc.

Anyways, I'm gone for a week. Will post next Saturday.

[kilmenator]

I am back from vacation, will try to post something of substance tomorrow.

[gorckat]

I'm back- ended up needing off work on Monday as well for my move and I have no desk for the PC at the momnet (old one was too big for the new house).

Anyway- as too my "I got nothing to hide"- couldn't it just be the truth? I don't have anything too hide. Saying it is a scum tell is WIFOM:

-a townie has nothing too hide
-a scum would therefore say he has nothing to hide
-but if a person says he has nothing to hide, he'd be accussed of being scum
-so a scum wouldn't say it lest he be accussed of being scum
-so he could say it because he knows he'd be accussed and could poiunt out the WIFOM

I think that's the correct way it breaks down- I've missapplied the term and how it works before.

[Off the Mark]

Anyway- as too my "I got nothing to hide"- couldn't it just be the truth? I don't have anything too hide. Saying it is a scum tell is WIFOM:

Yeah, it could just be truth of course. But it's one of those things where you have to look at the motivation for saying it. Anyway, I used that line in a recent game. I wasn't scum, I was a survivor, and I really did "have nothing to hide" because I was prepared to claim if I needed to. But at the same time, I was being a little dishonest when I said it, because I was not a townie, and I was giving a townie impression with my posts. So it makes me question your use of the same phrase.

[gorckat]

My motivation was responding to pie's request for games as scum and town. I could have responded, "I'm a noob- I don't have a predictable style yet" or "Why? Can't you see I'm town based on my play here?"

Instead, I gave him all I had with the statement in question.

[Off the Mark]

Man, nothing is happening in this game. I decided to analyze the inHim bandwagons to see if anything stands out. Here's the order:

Dasquian
IH <-- dead townie
Fonz <-- dead townie
OTM
gorckat
kilmenator

Now we're at lynch -1. Interestingly, Pete D calls attention to this just so no one accidentally hammers inHim. I consider this a point in Pete D's favor.

I would say gorckat and kilm are in the most suspicious positions here. They waited until momentum was firmly established before jumping on board. But of course it could be legitimate too.

Superstring votes for CES.

Nanook also votes CES.

After inHim's refusal to claim, I decide to unvote, putting him at lynch -2.

Pie says he doesn't want to hammer inHim until CES claims, and inHim claims.

Nanook then votes for inHim, says refusal to claim is scummy. Nanook puts him back at lynch -1.

I vote for CES.

Pete D votes for CES.

Nanook unvotes inHim and votes for CES. (seems to be a bit of a follower)

Then there's some unvotes as we discuss with MBL who has replaced CES.

inHim votes for me

I vote for inHim

Bunch of discussion... eventually Pete D votes for me

Fonz votes for me, putting me at 3 votes (I lost track of inHim, he has 3 or 4 at this point)

gorckat unvotes inHim <-- seems to be following a bit too

I FOS gorckat, apparently I had the same thoughts the first time through

gorckat votes for inHim (he says re-reading makes him feel better about this - at least he's taking his own stand here)

inHim is now at 5, MBL is at 3, I am at 3 votes

Pie says inHim is definitely the wrong lynch for today because MBL is the better target. (both turn up town, so make of that what you will)

Nanook says he still thinks MBL is scum

And that's where it ends... inHim is lynched with 5 votes.

Analysis: I don't know, I can't make much out of that mess. Gorckat twice voted in the lynch -2 position, which is somewhat common for scum. His final vote also acted as a sort of hammer on inHim, since it created a gulf between inHim and myself/MBL, who were both at 3. But I know that all three of us on the chopping block were town, so I don't know what else to make of this. I guess I'm still leaning towards superstring as the #1 suspect, but I wouldn't be too surprised if gorckat was scum now. I'm neutral on him at this point.

Other comments on the comings/goings and order of the bandwagon?

[pete d]

It may also be useful to examine the kilm wagon (just before the inhim wagon):

I put a vote on, stayed there for a while

gorckat votes inhim to make him explain "scummy mediating"
Gorckat votes kilm
gorckat votes thorgot

OtM votes kilm
inhim votes kilm

dasq votes inhim

superstring comes in, doesn't add much, votes kilm

gorckat votes kilm (-2)

> inhim wagon builds up.

My updated relative suspicions:

gorckat, superstring

OtM
pie, Nanook


Dasq

kilm

[gorckat]

OTM: You're very wishy-washy on thinking I'm scum. Everything you said is either qualified by something like "it could be legitimate" or is something that Nanook did (following), though you don't list him as possible scum. You say you're neutral on me, but that you wouldn't be surprised if I'm scum along with string (slight rephrasing/ordering here).

Also, on saying that I psuedo-hammered inHim...if I were scum and knew that MBL and inHim and you were town, why would I need to make such a bold, possibly reckless, vote? I could have let the deadline take out any one of three townies.

pete: What exactly are you showing with your kilm wagon listing? You show my votes moving at the beginning, which I've explained previously. Did anyone else move their votes during the kilm wagon?

If I'm more suspicious to you than I was previously, can you tell me why?

[Off the Mark]

Also, on saying that I psuedo-hammered inHim...if I were scum and knew that MBL and inHim and you were town, why would I need to make such a bold, possibly reckless, vote? I could have let the deadline take out any one of three townies.

Agreed, that's one of the reasons I'm neutral on you and not suspicious. Nanook's actions on the wagons do look suspicious. How come he was willing to place a lynch -1 vote on inHim, but then at the end you wanted to stay on MBL?

[Off the Mark]

EBWOP - that last "you" should have been a "he"

I guess I turned it into a question for Nanook in mid-sentence.

[Off the Mark]

gorck - I never said you could be "scum along with string". I am evaluating everyone's case individually. I don't see any blatant scum connections at this point. Interesting that you would jump to that conclusion though, hmmm.

[gorckat]

Sorry- I misread this: "I guess I'm still leaning towards superstring as the #1 suspect, but I wouldn't be too surprised if gorckat was scum now."

[gorckat]

EBWOP: FWIW- I also see string as #1, but we're in some limbo waiting for any prods to resolve (go, go gadget PM-powers )

[Off the Mark]

OK, I read over my own bandwagon a couple times, and Nanook is most suspicious to me now. It's like he wanted to get on the first inHim bandwagon, but he didn't want to hammer. Once I unvoted, he got on the bandwagon, since he could do so without hammering. Then later he chose not to switch his vote near the end of the day because he didn't want to arouse suspicion.

FOS: Nanook

Still think superstring has a good chance of being scum, but want to get others' feedback before I place a vote.