433: Dry, bland, generic mafia: Game Over

[Pie_is_good]

This is a shameless "Hi, I'm here" post. I'll try and skim over the weekend, then read in depth the weekend after that.

Scum may begin enjoying their last week of the game.

[Pie_is_good]

Heh, that post actually generated discussion?

Yeah, I was referring to my own post there. After a brief skim of the recent stuff, my gut is telling my Gorckat is our scum, but I haven't taken the time to put my finger on anything concrete yet. No defense needed yet, but expect something to follow.

[Pie_is_good]

Dasquain

Dasquain seemed to make quite a bit of sense - I found myself agreeing with Das's posting early on. Got a bit of unneccesary crap for putting on a fourth randombandwagon vote, but defended it just fine. Nothing really jumped out at me as scummy, and given that Das has been a reasonably active poster, he hasn't really twirked my scumdar. I think I just made up a new word.

Anyways, Das also had some defending of CES later in the game. I disagreed with it, but it seemed genuine from Das's perspective. As someone said earlier, mafia is a game of lynching scum, not lynching people who disagree with you.

Dodgy/CES

Dodgy played his game scummy as hell (I tended to agree with The Fonz in most posting). Claim of doctor? Eh. It's a

very

fakable claim as scum. And, "no reason to disbelieve the doc claim?" Eh? How about the whole "Dodgy was acting scummy" thing? And why is he getting off the hook for throwing a hissy fit? I'm not sure why the bandwagon against him died. I'd have stayed on it.

CES retracts dodgy's claim, which is scummy, on the following logic: If Dodgy really was protown, then we can assume his blowup was, in fact, a blowup, and not a ploy. If Dodgy was blowing up as town, I'd think he'd go for the "I told you so" sentiment sooner than the calculated lie-that-helps scum - as angry as he was, I don't see Dodgy having the foresight to try and draw out a counterclaim.

In the mean time, CES has been making 1 sentence posts, which seems to me like an attempt to lie low until the suspicion of Dodgy has diffused. That's certainly what I would do if I were replacing into Dodgy's position as scum. As town, I'd be willing to put my neck on the line a bit more to scumhunt.

dom:inic/IH

I got a good vibe from dom:inic's somewhat sparse posting. He took sides quite clearly in the posts he made, which makes me forgive his lurk - I seriously doubt his lurking, despite being active lurking, was an attempt to allow himself to fence-sit.

IH hasn't posted anything of substance yet

Gorckat

Lurked through most of the beginning of the game. Unlike dom's posts, Gorc's posts seem to be deliberately agreeing with the crowd - nobody can look back on the general wave of arguments being made and single Gorckat out to be accused of anything. Which is scummy.

He then turns around and votehops like CRAZY (votes for 4 different people, three of them twice, in the span of 13 posts). Echoes the crowd when asked for reasoning (plus some crap reasoning of his own - generating discussion this late in day 1? C'mon). He then accuses Thorgot of lurking, after doing it himself for the first half of the game. Has crappy reasons for not voting CES ("What if he was town?"). In a particularly hypocritical post, he goes from playing the n00b card to saying he's learned from experience that votehopping is effective. Glorckat has twirked my scumdar quite a bit as well.

Eh, it's late. I'll finish up analysis of the other players later. More to come.

In the mean time,

UNVOTE (if voting), VOTE: CES

. CES has done nothing to make up for Dodgy's extreme scuminess, and honestly, he should be the frontrunner here.

[Pie_is_good]

1) Lurking: Had a week w/o access at work and too much going on at home to post, which was during the Dodgy drama. Also had several days out of town early-mid May.

I don't consider Lurking suspicious in any way; this was just meant as a comment about your play. Sorry for the confusion.

2) Nope- I can't be accused of much...except not being accusable. Is this a "too-townie" attack?

No, it's not. The

reason

you're not accusable is not that you haven't done anything scummy - it's that you've yet to come up with an original idea of your own. Following the crowd like you did implies that you are unwilling to risk your own "safety" in the game to find some scum. And

that

's scummy.

3) I explained my vote hops (and touch on it again in a sec) as best I could in the last post.

The fact that you move votes around so readily makes it seem like you're looking for

any

bandwagon that will catch on - not neccesarily the correct one.

4) Generating discussion late- yep. Not much was happening, there was no deadline and no wagon and thus little info being put out there. I also explained, iirc, why I chose CES (lack of anything since I had earlier explained my willingness to give him a pass)

You chose pretty much everyone; not just CES. There was plenty of material to work with; you didn't need to create more. That seems like pretty artifical reasoning.

5) Yes- I'm a noob. I'm gonna learn from pretty much

every

game I'm in or will be in now and in the near future. And I didn't say vote hopping was effective. I said voting a person was an effective way to get questions answered when they'd been avoided.

I didn't accuse you of "being a noob," I accused you of "playing the noob card." The fact that you aren't experienced is good to know, and I'll take it into account when analyzing, but it's in no way an excuse to act scummy.

Wasn't I the first to vote kilm a couple pages back? And I'm on kilm again again, awaiting answers that (at least when I started this ~30 minutes ago, stupid work) haven't been answered on the whole Fonz following.

I imagine kilm is also under your suspicion for lurking and following, etc, etc?

Why does dom get a pass? I took a side on CES. I said "Don't lynch" at first and still do at the moment.

I haven't really analyzed Kilm yet, but yes, the actions you describe would, in theory, be scummy. Dom gets a pass because his posting didn't come off as a deliberate attempt to shield himself from accusations, while yours did.

[Pie_is_good]

Oh, nonono. You were absolutely right to adress my post. I was just responding.


MOD EDIT:
Off the mark: 1 (ces)

Kilmentator: 5 (Pete d, off the mark, inhim, superstring gorckat)

Eletriar 1 (the fonz)
inhim: 2 (Daquian IH)
CES: 1 (Pie)

[Pie_is_good]

Could someone please explain to me why the Dodgy Wagon got derailed? I don't understand.

[Pie_is_good]

I'm against an inHim claim. Basically, I'm

always

in favor of someone so closed to being lynched claiming; however, CES got there first (in the alternate form of Dodgy). That being said, I'm finding InHim's resistance to claiming a bit scummy ("It helps the town" is unneccesarily vague, and he attacked Gorckat rather than Gorckat's legitimate point).

So, yeah. IGMEOY: InHim, but to force a claim right now would be a mistake.

[Pie_is_good]

Given that inHim is at lynch-1 I am having a hard time understanding your post. You don't want him to claim because Dodgy already claimed? How is that relevant?

And you think his refusal to claim is scummy, (I agree) but you still don't want him to claim? You seem to just want him to get hammered without claiming - how is that helpful?

The entity of Dodgy/CES has not claimed - CES retracted Dodgy's claim.

I'm against a hammuhing of InHim until CES first completes his long-overdue claim, then inHim himself claims. While this happens, I'm happy to rack up more evidence against inHim just so that the time is not wasted, but in the mean time we need to see CES claim.

Claims shouldn't make or break your arguments, so I won't claim - if you think I should be lynched, then you think I should be lynched, right?

Wrong. Claims quite often DO make or break arguments - claims provide much more solid and testable facts than post analysis.

[Pie_is_good]

I honestly can't say I'm happy to let CESDodgy off the hook just because he replaced, then lurked. Replacement should not change the status of scummitude of the player in question.

The inHim wagon came up afterwards, which means inHim should claim afterwards - but CES should be the one with limited information when he makes his claim. The InHim wagon seems to me like an attempt to detract attention from CES.

[Pie_is_good]

Hm.

Although Nanook is absolutely right in saying that MBL's post was a boatload of WIFOM, he's failing to recognize that reducing the situation to a WIFOM is an adequate defense. WIFOM means that the actions in question could, in theory, be taken by both town and scum - so conceding that the actions Dodgy/CES/MBL took are being interpreted through WIFOM is a point in MBL's favor.

However, it always rubs me the wrong way when replacements pretend to have some sort of psychic connection with their replacees. MBL is acting like he somehow has more knowledge as to what Dodgy was thinking than the rest of the town does - which is completely untrue. And I find that scummy.

I still feel that nothing has been done to reverse Dodgy's scumminess, and CES's active lurkitude. Vote stands, and I'd still like a claim out of MBL.

[Pie_is_good]

Dodgy sent a threatening letter to someone claiming to be the forum administrator and saying he'd gut their cat or something. I think it's pretty clear he was on some bad acid or hopped up on Twinkies. Do you really want to attribute significance to his play?

No, I've never really attributed signifance to that particular play - I've seen townies

and

scum flip out the way Dodgy did under pressure. It's pretty undeniable, though, that Dodgy was acting scummy before the flip-out, and that's the behavior which, in my humble opinion, has not yet been mitigated.

More importantly, do you really think angry scum would be more likely to make a senseless claim and leave the game than angry town? Cause that would require that he decided he wanted to help his teammates, while he was in the process of behaving in a completely selfish and irrational manner.

This is asking the wrong question.

I don't think that scum are more likely to flip out than townies. I

do

think, though, that when townies flip out, they're very likely to tell the truth about their role.

This is why I want a claim from you. Savvy?

Also, Fonz, we still have two weeks on the deadline. It strikes me as odd - not neccesarily scummy, but quite odd - that you outright ruleout most of the town.

[Pie_is_good]

MBL -- if you were in my position, would you want yourself to claim or not?

If so, why aren't you claiming?

If not, why are you deflecting attacks by saying "Well, you're in the minority" when there are objective reasons for you to not claim?

[Pie_is_good]

So you think that if I say "doctor" or "cop" or "vanilla" somehow you'll be better able to discern my alignment?

Um, yes. Even more so with you than others, because your entity has a history in this game of weird claiming, plus seeing as how it's currently between you and InHim, more information out of both of you would be good.

I've worked that through logically in my head and I don't think it's a pro-town request. If you're a doctor, you're drawing attention to yourself. If you're not a doctor, you're not respecting the real doctor's judgment, be that me or someone else who's deciding to remain silent. For all you know, Nanook's the doctor and has a perfectly valid reason for stubbornly voting me right now. More likely not though, because I think the real doctor would be playing this situation much cooler.

Ugh. This is a pet peeve of mine. If doctors get nightkilled, that means they

succeeded

in their job of protecting the practical power roles [note: this only applies to game with less than ~15 people, including this one]. But seriously, stop stalling. Claims will be MUCH easier to fake after a night passes. I don't want to let that happen.

Claims are given for reasons. As part of the process of handing over info to town in order to catch a specific scum. In order to appease town when one's on the verge of a lynch. As part of a massclaim that will catch scum in lies and by process of elimination.

Also, to make things tough on potential scum. If you're protown, MBL, the claim will only be a little detrimental, but if you're scum, the claim will screw you hard. This is why it's a risk worth taking. Plus, your predeccesor

was

about to be lynched, and the town backed off just because he got replaced, which I hate.

I've retracted that claim and Pie's calling for one is unfounded. Unfortunately, calling for unnecessary claims is not an alignment tell of Pie's.

[Pie_is_good]

2) Pie states a half-falsehood. I don't claim to know more about what Dodgy was thinking than town was except for the fact that I'm the only one who knows he was town and therefore I can eliminate certain motivations for his actions. Other than that, I can only evaluate his words the same way the rest of you would and reach logical conclusions, and try to share them with all of you. Pie also zeroes in on CES's lurkitude, which I point out in (1) is a misguided strategy, and says nothing has been done to reverse Dodgy's scumminess, which I think is a dreadful falsehood. You're saying I'm playing less pro-town than Dodgy did?

This is the post that made me accuse you of having a psychic connection with Dodgy:

1) Dodgy wouldn't have claimed as scum. It's extremely unlikely that he was this mad at a scumpartner for harrassing him, correct? So if he was scum with town harrassing him he'd want to screw over town with his claim. But by claiming doc he would have put himself and his scumteam in an awkward position and wouldn't hurt the town at all via his action. Fonz, if you're town you should have recognized this. So yeah, Dodgy was town pissed off at someone whose alignment he did not know, and he claimed something to shut them the hell up because he was pissed at them.

...in this post, you even said "Fonz, if you're town, you should have recognized all this." This does not line up with your new claim that your connection with dodgy only went so far as knowledge of his alignment.

To respond to the rest of your post: As for CES's lurkitude, it's legitimate to attack active lurkers (but not passive ones);

especially

people who make contentless posts (a form of active lurking). Why is this a misguided strategy?

Also, if it wasn't clear, I meant that

not nearly enough

has been done to mitigate Dodgy's scuminess; not

nothing at all

.

[Pie_is_good]

I have only ever made the following claims:

1) Before Dodgy's flipout, Dodgy was acting scummy
2) Much, much information can be gleaned from an MBL claim; such that it outweighs risk of giving scum information.
3) CES's active lurking was scummy.
4) You (MBL) acted overly sure of Dodgy's motivations for his actions, which is scummy.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the main unanswered question is:

If Dodgy is scum, what plausible circumstances are there that are consistant with Dodgy acting how he did?

Which is quite simple - Dodgy takes early heat from Fonz. Thinking himself to be somehow "better" than Fonz (as evidenced by Dodgy's posting), Dodgy starts pulling the "I'm an experienced player, you're a n00b" card. When this fails, Dodgy does whatever he can to make Fonz look bad - claim doctor; seeing as "doctor" is, for whatever reason, the role most towns are most paranoid of keeping hidden.

Because I think the rest of town and I should be able to pick apart Dodgy's actions for ourselves and figure out his motivations IN ADDITION to what I already know about his alignment.

And yet, you posted as "Dodgy obviously did what he did for X, Y, and Z reasons; I can't believe Fonz didn't figure it out." As though there was no room for error in your calculations of a third party's intentions.

Please be thorough, because it seems the crux of your argument for wanting me to claim is that Dodgy was equally or more likely to have taken this action as scum than as town.

Not really. The argument for wanting you to claim is just that a claim out of you would yield tons and tons of information with comparatively low risk. The argument for you being scummy, which is a very distinct one, is mostly centered around Dodgy being very scummy in the beginning of the game, and you and CES not really helping later on.

As for your point on CES actively lurking, I suppose you can make a ton of hay about his seven posts and their lack of content but you'd have to do it in the context of the other lurkers in this game and why you're singling him out. Not to mention that you'd be faced with the complication of explaining how his play in this game differs from his usual play.

The reason I single CES out over other lurkers is that it's pretty well established CES was active-lurking, whereas it's all a crapshoot with the other lurkers. I in no way support passive-lurkerlynching (In fact, I support lurker-lyncher-lynching), but active lurking is scummy and needs to die.

[Pie_is_good]

If I may, though, I'd like to weigh in on a few of the MBL/Fonz points

1. You insist that either CES or Dodgy lied.

I think the misunderstanding here is that CES

retracted

the claim without

confirming or denying

it. I agree with the Fonz that the claim needs to be worked back out of him, but there was never really any lying going on.

4. You insist that Lynch all Liars is unequivocally correct.

Lynch All Liars =/= Never Lie

]quote="MrBuddyLee"]Come to think of it, the real Fonz couldn't say he was ever w... w... wr... wr... .

http://www.tvacres.com/char_fonzarelli_arthur.htm

Hey, you're roleplaying, that's COOL. Ayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.[/quote]
Normally, however abrasive you want to play is between you and Fonz. But when we're under deadline, it'd be dandy if you could keep comments on track; we have enough substance to wade through already. You can yell at each other on day 2; I promise.

Thanks.

[Pie_is_good]

Please tell me what you'll learn if I claim vanilla. Then tell me what you'll learn if I claim doc. Then tell me what you'll learn if I claim cop. In detail, preferably, as there's "much, much" to be learned.

MBL, do you really expect me to tell you exactly how scummy I would find each potential claim? That would defeat the purpose. But I can tell you that enough discussion has centered around your claim and unclaim that an analysis of what roles you could have would not be difficult.

Here's my quote, please outline very specifically where you see it as oversure and where you see my conclusions significantly deviating from an application of common sense.

Dodgy wouldn't have claimed as scum.

It's extremely unlikely that he was this mad at a scumpartner for harrassing him, correct?

So if he was scum with town harrassing him he'd want to screw over town with his claim.

But by claiming doc he would have put himself and his scumteam in an awkward position and wouldn't hurt the town at all via his action. Fonz, if you're town you should have recognized this.

So yeah, Dodgy was town pissed off at someone whose alignment he did not know, and he claimed something to shut them the hell up because he was pissed at them.

Bolded phrases are the ones I took issue with. On your first post in from replacing, you're not qualified to make definitive statements like those.

It appears to me you're tilting at windmills, and possibly as a dilatory tactic.

I got tired of the "yes-he-is, no-he's-not" standstill with regards to InHim. Rather than defend inHim, I went after who I feel to be the best target. What's wrong with that?

MBL vs Pie - pie's tenacity is admirable but a waste of time. The numbers aren't there, he's not going to get lynched or forced to claim, move on, we have a deadline.

Any debate with MBL is, obviously, for the benefit of the observers - I'm not going to convince MBL that he's scum. If observers (read: you) are just going to ignore it all, frankly, you're the one wasting our time.

[Pie_is_good]

vote: inHim

Das and Pie have made good points questioning some of his actions and re-reading reaffirms my feeling that he's the best choice.

For my own analysis, do you mind specifying specifically which points you agreed with? I always get a bit suspicious when people say "Oh, yeah, I agree with those points that guy made a few pages ago. Vote: Somebody."

All I'm asking is for people to take a definitive stance on an issue (which happens to be lynching me). Those that cowered from this are the ones to note.

Fair enough.

Definitive Stance: inHim is the wrong lynch today, because MBL is a better target. This could change contingent upon people claiming.

As for suspicion listage, I'm finding Gorckat, MBL, and OTM at the top of my list. Fonz and Nanook seem fairly protown to me.

[Pie_is_good]

inHim is, generally, fairly anti-claim. The fact that he's giving dumb reasons for not claiming, although it frustrates me as much as the next guy, is not particularly a tell of role or alignment for him.

If you're lynching him based on his posting, that's legit in concept (although I'd disagree). But don't lynch him based on his refusal to claim.

[Pie_is_good]

That said, it's also not helpful to the town so why should we tolerate it? Anti-town play is anti-town play. I wouldn't expect anyone to put up with me if I had a meta play of sticking a fat, immoveable OMGUS vote on the first person to look my way, and if we're going meta, I don't think the game would be fun if everyone employed inHim's tactic, because...

'zactly. So why aren't you voting MBL? He was the first one to refuse to claim.

But a vanilla townie claim shouldn't change anyone's position. And besides, it's not like him not claiming hasn't gotten a reaction.

Not neccesarily true. Employment of Best Worst-Case Scenario in fake claiming is a very common example of WIFOMery.

[Pie_is_good]

Guys, we're massclaiming. It's settled.

Points in favor of massclaim: Lots of discussion has centered around claiming, which makes it all the more analyzable. Plus, judging from the sampling of Dead Bodies, this game is high on power roles. Both these are going to make it hard for scum to fake a claim.

OffTheMark - it's a roleclaim, not an alignment claim.

[Pie_is_good]

Oh, by the way:

I'm fine with kilmenator starting, then picking the next claimer.

Also, I have quite a bit to say about who I'm finding scummy, but I'm going to hold off until after the massclaim and I suggest you all do, too. The more of that information that gets out, the easier it is to fabricate a claim.

[Pie_is_good]

OffTheMark - it's a roleclaim, not an alignment claim.

I think he means, won't scum just claim vanilla townie, and where does that leave us?

Yep, that's what I meant.

...this won't happen.

If scum is dumb enough to do this, it would a) practically confirm our power roles, b) allow our power roles to coordinate with each other, c) figure out who's been acting un-vanilla townieish and lynch them. This would honestly be a best-case scenario for the town.

Allowing claimants to pick each other would allow scum to run through themselves or avoid each other, as they see fit. What about a dice determined random order?

I'm not a fan of a dice-determined order, because we should be able to do better than random given that we have information. To take power out of scum's hands, I'd be okay with Kilm determining the entire claim order as long as she goes first, though.

I would like to see Dasquian be one of the first to claim.

Why are you saying this? It is NOT helpful to the town for suspicions to be telegraphed. If you have reasons to suspect Dasquian, wait for after the massclaim, but it would be better if you hadn't said anything at all. This only helps scum.

[Pie_is_good]

There's such a disadvantage to going first that, hypothetically, if Kilm was scum and set up an awful scenario for the town, it would still be worth it for us.

Guess we're waiting on Kilm to start us off, then.

[Pie_is_good]

By the way, I think I should mention that I love this town. I was expecting to have to fight to make the massclaim happen.

[Pie_is_good]

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

[Pie_is_good]

Sorry.

Vanilla.

[Pie_is_good]

I'm not really feeling the Nanook or Dasq cases. OTM and Gorckat are my frontrunners.

OTM and Gorckat - could you both link me to a game where you were scum and a game where you were town?

[Pie_is_good]

Not really. You know what games you were scum in, and I don't really want to dig through the game to find out. But, if you're not responding, I guess I'll do that.

Also, FoS: OTM for having post 666.

[Pie_is_good]

OTM, you didn't really sell me on Superstring's guilt. You have a few legitimate points in there, namely:

I'm noticing that superstring seems to use lurking as his primary reason for FOS and voting people. This seems to be an easy crutch to fall back on for scum. It allows them to do little true analysis of posting if they can just keep simply saying, "This guy is lurking, let's pressure him." I am getting more confident that superstring is scum. I've certainly never seen pro-town players this stuck on lurking before.

...I agree wholeheartedly with this. However, the rest of your case against him seemed a bit circumstantial - 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.

All that said, you pretty much sold me on your (OTM) own innocence. 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. Plus, I've breifly reviewed the games you linked me, and they point in your favor. As scum, you posted pretty consistantly medium-length posts. As town, you posted short, 1-or-2 sentence posts until something piqued your interest, at which point you started posting longer. This game is more consistant with the Townie posting pattern.

Anyways, I'll review Gorckat shortly.

[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.

[Pie_is_good]

Vote: Gorckat

Time to get something moving. I just keep getting a worse and worse feeling when I read his posts. They seem forced.

[Pie_is_good]

First off, HUGE FRIGGIN FOS: OTM and PETED for lurkerlynching. What the hell, people? We're pretty much at LYLO here. Why would you ever, ever vote for a lurker, unless you want to hit an easy target?

[*]Pie_is_good, post 318 [don't like] – CES is a player who pretty much posts 1-liners, and I'm fairly sure Pie oughta know that. Calling him scummy

because

he is posting 1-liners seems to be ignoring that. Furthermore, nobody has in any way counterclaimed the Doctor claim, so why the hell would you go voting the claimed Doctor? I just don't understand these votes. I suppose I have to concede that it's possible to hold this position as town, given that both Nanook and IH also both voted CES upon replacing in. *sigh*

It wasn't the 1-liners I had a problem with, it was the infrequency and lack of substance of the 1-liners I didn't like. CES was in the hotseat; he needed to change something to help the town out a little.

In closed setups, Counterclaims are not neccesarily effective.

Sometimes, the real doctor will be an idiot and remain hidden. Sometimes, there just isn't a doctor. Plus, doctor is a very weak role, and there's not much to lose by lynching one. Plus, I mostly subscribe to the BabyJesus Doctorlynch philosophy.

I mean, I'm not trying to make excuses here, because whatever the case, I was wrong. I'm just trying to say it's not abnormal for someone to think that.

re: inHim's claim

I did think inHim should claim. I just thought CES should claim first.

[Pie_is_good]

From my own experience, when CES is actually helpful, he turns out to be scum, and when he is being completely useless, he is often town. Do you agree or disagree with this? I just want to gauge how you read CES, since I probably do it differently than most people.

Given that this is the second game I've played with CES, I'm going to pass judgement.

So he can just lurk his way to victory? Maybe he's lurking because he sees that everyone thinks he is scummy and he's figured, "Well frig that game then." Who knows?

Yes, exactly.

Who Knows?

Why take a risk on a lurker when we have information?

re: SSF Wagon

Not completely feeling this one, but I'll reread. What mostly disturbs me about this bandwagon is how quickly it took off. In my experience, scum are less likely to bus their partners as the game (is at/approaches) LyLo.

[Pie_is_good]

re: Gorc's previous games

Yes, I did, and I don't think they're in your favor.

Also, I'm finding something a bit off about how Gorc keeps asking me if I've read his games... I can't decide if it's scummy or not yet, but I'm posting this for later reference.

[Pie_is_good]

"The bandwagon could be growing because it's a legit bandwagon" is not even

close

to a refutation.

Yes, it's a possibility.

But, for one thing, I don't think the case against SSF is as bulletproof as the 1-sidedness of the wagon makes it out to be. Also, even if the speed of the bandwagon winds up meaning nothing, vote patterns are very much worth looking at. I'm finding myself agreeing with OTM on most of these points.

Also...

Is it just me, or does anyone else see something wrong with the bold?

...sits poorly with me. It's like he's asking someone else to make his case for him. I also don't like Gorc's dual-bandwagon citizenship. It's like he'll take any lynch he can get.

[Pie_is_good]

Whoops. Sorry, guys. This completely slipped off my radar.

blah blah blah False Dilemma blah blah blah

Please explain why you chose the particular groupings that you did. I kinda have the impression that we got too hung up in the "that's a false dilemma" thing to properly analyze why gorkcat said what he did.

Why are scum any more likely to not read the thread than town? Not reading the thread thoroughly would jeopardise both alignments fairly equally, TBH.

QFT

re: Scum Bussing each other

When I said it doesn't happen as often at this stage in the game, I should have said

it's not good play as often at this stage in the game

. Think about it - bussing a partner is only worth it if (obviously) the drawbacks are outweighed by the benefits. The drawbacks are the death of a partner. The benefits are a dead townie. Given that the death of a townie helps scum more when they're closer to winning, the benefits are greater when scum is closer to winning. Scum is closer than average to winning this game. Therefore, bussing is not good play as often.

re: OTM

I'm getting the feeling that OTM (correctly, imho) suspected Gorkcat for Macro reasons, then got stuck at a point where he was so sure of Gorkcat's guilt (correctly, imho) that he read every little thing Gork said as scummy. I mean, I can see some of his points being somewhat legit, but the statements in question are so insignificant that they hardly matter.

re: Dasq

I'm getting the feel of misguided townie. Nothing has struck me as particularly scummy. He seems to be picking and choosing what to spend his analysis on, and doing it well - something that scum rarely do.

re: Gorc

I'm still pretty sure he's scum. Most of his hypotheticals have almost a forced feeling about them, like he sat down and said "I need to contribute something to look innocent" rather than genuinely giving his opinions. The nail in the coffin for me was the reread of his scum and town games - if you haven't done so, I'd reccomend taking a look at those. There was at least one obvious trend common to this game and his scum game that wasn't in his town game.

re: SSF

I dunno, his detatchment/lack of enthusiasm/sarcasm almost seems like a point in his favor, as much as I hate to admit it. In this tight of a game, I'd see scum on the chopping block caring a bit more. If he had scum partners and he was screwing over someone other than himself, for example, I think he'd care a bit more.

[Pie_is_good]

True, Dasq. It also holds given that Kilm is being less helpful than he is. It's hard to feel obligated when you're not the worst.

[Pie_is_good]

Das, PJ and pete or flea, OTM and pie. Yes, the second has a dash of OMGUS. Whatever. They're not in order of likelihood, and both have a flex spot in them I could swap with another person.

I'm going to try and remake my case of exception to this post - I don't think I explained my problems with it well (read: at all), so I didn't really get the answers I was looking for. The whole thing reeks of

safeness

Problem 1:

It's way too simplistic. I think it's fairly obvious that {Flea, OTM, Pie} have different views on the game than {Das, PJ, pete}. It's unrealistic, though, to expect that the remaining scum will all have the exact same viewpoint in every issue in the game. Gorc's demonstrated high-enough level analysis to know this, I believe.

Problem 2:

There's no room for error. He listed everyone in the game besides himself as "maybe scum." Whoopy doo. He later started favoring the {flea, Pie, OTM} side as scum, but not without first sandbagging himself by claiming "a touch of OMGUS."

OTM's refused to be convinced that I'm not scum.

Do you believe this is scummy? If so, why?

I leave the door open to the chance flea is and he isn't (<10% in my mind).

Really? I've probably never been more than 50% sure of someone as scum in my career. This seems like an odd statement overall - why so sure, and why broadcast to the town exactly how sure you are?

Would you like some syrup for your waffles? Color me stubborn or call it OMGUS, but that seems like too many qualifiers and is weaker than an earlier statement of the same thing.

Analogy time:
I offer you a "game" where we flip a coin. If it comes up heads, you give me $2. If it comes up tails, I give you $1000.

You can't be sure that you're going to win money, but you can be damn sure that it's a good deal to make. Same thing goes here. I'm nowhere near

sure

that you're scum, but I'm pretty sure you're the town's best bet.

[Pie_is_good]

1) No, it can't. You have correctly grouped the game into the two polarized viewpoints, and then go on to conclude that one group is scum and the other isn't.

There is no bearing for that conclusion.

2) I think you misunderstood my point. I'm accusing you of fence-sitting while the rest of us our scumhunting. If you're not scum, people can turn around and accuse me of being very, very wrong - but I'm willing to take that risk if it helps find scum. What risks are

you

taking?

re: OTM

a) There wasn't a definitive answer in there. Is he scummy or isn't he? b) Has the refusal for others to get on board the fleawagon given you pause?

re: Percentages

I dunno, it's hard to put a number on these things. I'll put you at 40%. You are a much, much safer bet than the dice (obviously, or I'd be voting someone else).

Also, my question as to why you freely gave out your percentage was directed at figuring out why you felt the need for the town to know your personal chances.

Also, can we get some third (fourth, a little) opinions in here?

[Pie_is_good]

=(

I tried, SSF, I tried

The preceding statement is not applicable if I am, in fact, wrong.

[Pie_is_good]

The preceding post is not applicable because I am, in fact, never wrong.

[Pie_is_good]

They pretty clearly crosskilled.

Anyways, Gorc still looks like plausible scum to me, but I'm also going to go for the pete-partner-reread.

I propose that we operate the LyLo using pseudovotes, as a way to determine The Hotseat without risking quicklynch until we're good and ready.

Example:

Pseudo: Gorckat

Pseudocount

Gorckat - 1 (Pie)

[Pie_is_good]

Actually, you know what? Logical Analysis time.

Players Left:
CPE (innocent)
PJ
Pie
Gork
OTM

Assuming exactly 2 scum left, and assuming [OTM, Gork] are not the remaining scum, there is exactly one scum between me and PJ. Proof left to the reader.

I know I'm not scum. Therefore,

Vote: PJ

.

I think it serves as a strike against PJ that, for all his analysis, he couldn't come up with that basic logic that would put himself in considerable danger.

[Pie_is_good]

@pie: Are you saying there's some kind of proof that you and pj aren't scum together?

To a third party, no, there's no proof of that.

re: PJ

Did "OTM and Gorc probably aren't scum together, which would narrow the decision down to me and Pie, only I'm not going to tell the town that so I can reread first" cross your mind, or did that not cross your mind at all?

Also, I find the whole "If Gorc is town, he should be attacking Pie" comment quite unsubtle.

I want to see if pie can show how he and pj aren't scum together. I get the gorc/OTM aren't bit (our interactions would get an Emmy for distancing), but I don't see how it still couldn't be pie and pj together.

Again, Gorc, to a third party, PJ and I could theoretically be partners. But from my position in this game, I know I'm not scum, meaning my vote was justified.

If I had to make one, my best argument against PJ and I being partners would be that it means you're town. Which I don't find likely.

re: Gorc's [Pie/OTM] prediction

Uh, you can't really accuse me of coming out of the gate against you day 3. I've been attacking you since early day 2. Nothing happened that would change that.



I'm pretty dead certain of Gorc/PJ at this point.

[Pie_is_good]

It'd be nice to hear from our confirmed innocent at some point.

[Pie_is_good]

PJ, that doesn't directly answer my question. The game seemed to suggest OTM/Gorc as Not Partners. Did the idea that

assuming the two of them weren't partners, we would be at each other's throats

cross your mind at any point?

I also agree to deferring the vote to CPE.

[Pie_is_good]

Unvote: PJ, Vote: Gorckat

This isn't a whoopy-do-I'm scum hammer, this is an I-think-it's-best-to-just-end-the-day-now hammer. If neccessary, I'll discuss the logic more in-depth tomorrow.

Night.

[Pie_is_good]

Right now, I'll say this: From my perspective, I know with 100% certainty that Gorc is scum. Since I know PJ's scum, if Gorc were town, PJ would have hammered Gorc already.

It's like a party!

[Pie_is_good]

So what made you pretend the game is over when it totally isn't?

[Pie_is_good]

Whatever twilight talk you say here will be debunked as soon as TSQ posts the lynch scene.

[Pie_is_good]

Oh, were you talking to Gorc?

[Pie_is_good]

Oh.

Damn.

Well,

Vote: PJ

, seeing as CPE's confirmed innocent and all.

My logic for voting Gorckat was: From my perspective, I "knew" he was scum (assuming 2 scum, that is. Which turned out to be wrong). That way, if OTM is nightkilled, CPE gets to fully weigh in anyways (meaning there was no problem to ending the day), and if CPE is nightkilled, I can be reasonably sure that Gorc would make the right choice for the town.

Now then... I'd be happy to put a case together against PJ, CPE, if that would be helpful. But sometimes that's just distracting when you're the confirmed innocent in an endgame. Up to you.

[Pie_is_good]

Will try and put something up this weekend.

[Pie_is_good]

Will be posted by tonight.

[Pie_is_good]

Okay, didn't get quite as much time for this as I expected. I'll just make a few points here and there. Expect a counter-analysis of posts and who mentioned who and in-depth stuff, but for now I'll just knock out the obvious points to be made.

OTM is dead.

This is

huge

. If I were scum, my optimizing play would be to nightkill you (CPE). That way, I would be left with 3 unconfirmed innocents, one of which (OTM) just spent the last day completely convinced that PJ was scum. In this scenario, it's 50/50 between myself and PJ. Hypothetical Scenario A is: PieScum has a well-over 2/3 chance of winning. Hypothetical Scenario B is: PieScum has about a 1/2 chance of winning.

To pre-empt the inevitable "But Pie, that's WIFOM!" let me say this: Yes, it is WIFOM. What does that mean? It means that the above logic cannot be used to conclude with 100% certainty that PJ is scum. The above logic can, however, be used to conclude that PJ is probably scum (it's a significant strike against him, anyways). You can actually do math to prove stuff, but jist of the logic behind it is: if PJ were no more suspicious than usual because of the WIFOMery, there would never be a reason for PieScum to partake in the WIFOMery in the first place. Which PJ claims I did.

PJ's First Point is Total WIFOM, and Not the Kind that Makes Me Scummy

With a few small exceptions, scum can choose exactly how much they associate with each other. This means that any case such as the one PJ is making is a worthless attempt to outguess hypothetical scum. PJ's point would only be valid if there were an inherent benefit to scum for voting seperately, which there isn't.

PJ's table does not lead to the conclusions he claims it does.

... this should make it pretty damned clear Pie was picking and choosing who he talked about.

Um. Obviously. I'm not about to consult random.org to see who I should comment on in my posts.

I'll respond to this more in detail when I can support it with numbers, but: Some people play a more involved/noticable game than others, and those are (obviously) the people I'm going to spend my time talking about. PeteD played an unremarkable game, which is arguably scummy unto itself, but it's logical that I wouldn't talk about him much.

Argument by "Hidden Agenda," especially when the scum has the upper hand, is bull.

When you are scum, what do you focus on in your posts? Honestly: when the scum had the upper hand in a game, have you

ever

thought to yourself "How can I sneakily subconsciously presuade the town to unvote my scum partner?" You think, "How can I look like a townie?"

Like I said, more later.

[Pie_is_good]

Impressive, PJ. I honestly thought town had that one in the bag.

It was probably a mistake to partially respond to that post - it gave PJ the chance to claim a few of his points as unanswered "victories." Of course, some of his responses (such as the WIFOM one) deserved a bit more analysis - he put up a nice smokescreen there.

Formal apologies to Gorckat. I honestly, honestly thought you were scum. I think I got myself into that mode of thinking where you interpret everything that's said through the "Gorckat is scum" perspective and fail to see town motivations for

anything

.

It sucks losing on a WIFOM fallacy, 'cause that's pretty much my third Thing after vig and massclaim, but it was well deserved by PJ. You played a good shorthanded game.

...yeah, that's my postmortem. Congratulations PJ/pete d. TSQ, you rule as always.

Pie