Mini 527 - Doom in Valencia - Game Over!

[soupfly]

@javert: self metagaming takes us into WIFOM territory...cut it out, its not helping your case.

Officialzors vote count;

Not Voting; Everyone

[gorckat]

vote: Javert

I'm trusting my gut.

[Javert]

@javert: self metagaming takes us into WIFOM territory...cut it out, its not helping your case.

The only complaint against me that I have seen and can tangibly rebut is that I call myself town, and that I am pointing out I have never been lynched as town.

The only response I can give -- and it is a true response which you can verify yourself -- is that this is how I act whether I am town or scum.

As such,

this is not WIFOM

. WIFOM is when somebody claims something along the following lines:

If I were scum, I would do X.

What I am claiming is that I do X

regardless of my alignment

-- I am not making an argument for my alignment either way, but instead showing that those particular "points" against me ought not to be points against me, given how I play.

If you still believe this to be WIFOM, please give me your definition of it, and then show I fit into your definition.

~~~~~

My initial reaction to gorckat's vote is that he is showing a continual habit of not explaining his votes up-front; he gives himself plenty of time to think of reasons later, which makes it all the more difficult to gauge the sincerity of his votes. In particular, this is reminding me of his Day One neko2086, where he voted, did not explain, then vaguely averred "I've seen a handful of inconsistencies/things not jiving for me", and then after

other

players started attacking neko2086, he began using those using those reasons in the justification of his own vote. I don't believe he ever added his own commentary on his vote for at least two weeks.

[neko2086]

Javert has a very good point here. That was pretty much the problem I had with gorckat D1.

Also, looking at gorckat's last post, he didn't even mention anything about Javert. His arguments were mostly about Arakorn, so why the sudden change?

The Arakorn concerns are valid, though. This is going to be a difficult call. I'm still not sold on Javert, though. An appeal to emotion is not helpful, whether done constently or not. That just makes it a convenient excuse. I will agree, though, that that won't be enough to make a case. We need to look at every angle here.

[gorckat]

I know I made solid points re: Arakorn, but I think a scum Javert is more likely to get off in endgame than a scum Arakorn, thus I'm going that way. I know its intangible, but its my gut. Arakorn would be the likely choice at endgame.

[Javert]

Hmm.

FoS: gorckat

, that is a prime scum tactic, and one I have personally used before. Essentially, the tactic is as follows:

1.)

Determine how many lynches you need to win.

2.)

Then decide who you will lynch in order to achieve that number.

3.)

To choose the

order

of who to lynch, start with those players who are

hardest

to lynch, so that the endgame will give you as much leeway as possible.

4.)

Even if you fail to get that player lynched, you can still revert back to the easier lynched, hopefully having successfully discredited the more difficult player so endgame will not be

as

difficult as it was previously.

I will not be voting or coming to any firm conclusions until after I have had time to read the game, and ask questions. Feel free to respond to this post, though.

[Javert]

^ Additionally, if you are voting me on the basis that Arakorn is the easier lynch tomorrow, then your explanation of "gut" really does not apply as a justification to your vote.

Gut is something tingly inside you that makes you think a player is more likely to be scum -- not something that makes you think somebody will be easier or more difficult to lynch.

[gorckat]

then your explanation of "gut" really does not apply as a justification to your vote.

Sure it does.

1) I think one of you and Arakorn are scum.
2) I have nothing concrete on you- just a "tingly" uneasy feeling
3) I have points against Arakorn
4) My gut also tells me you would be harder to lynch in endgame

At this point, reason does enter in a tad:

If you're harder to lynch in endgame, and you're one of the two candidates for scum, then I go for you today and the easy, process of elimination scum tomorrow (there is an additonal nuance to tomorrow's lynch proceeding if you're not the scum, but I'm holding that back and will point it out provided I survive the night).

Just like you outlined in "scum tactic", except my motive is pro-town.

[neko2086]

o0

So, Arakorn is the more logical lynch, but you'd rather lynch Javert just because you don't want him there in the endgame?

Your reasoning almost sounds OK, except it relies on the fact that Javert and Arakorn are the only two possibilities for scum. For you, sure, this is true. But if you want to convince the rest of us, you have to keep in mind that there are three or four possibilites, you and I aren't necessarily cleared in everyone's eyes. I for one, think you are a definite possibility, thus your plan looks like an attempt to set up a seemingly fool-proof way for town to win, when in reality it could be the exact ticket for a town loss. In fact, if you're scum, it's the only ticket for a town loss unless you can convince everyone that I'm scum, which will obviously be more difficult. Essentially, you've outlined exactly what gorckat-scum needs to do if gorckat is indeed scum (yes, I'm addressing you in 3rd person). Calling it pro-town doesn't necessarily make it so.

[gorckat]

So, Arakorn is the more logical lynch, but you'd rather lynch Javert just because you don't want him there in the endgame?

Should the difficulty of lynching a person not be considered?

Essentially, you've outlined exactly what gorckat-scum needs to do if gorckat is indeed scum

True.

Do you think my willingness and eagerness to lynch the godfather day one, when I very easily could have pushed Arakorn, or even you, iirc, down is likely a scum move? Would I have voiced support for MeMe's lynch and guilt in the same post I said I needed time away from the game (when using that time could have allowed me distance from her)?

[Arakorn]

Would MeMe have voted for me, along with another scum (can't remember the name) if I was also scum?

[Arakorn]

To add to that, I'm 99% sure that we should lynch Javert or Gorckat, but of course you others are only 66.

Of those two, I'd rather lynch Gorkcat, but I have no particulare evidence against him, just felt that he was a bit suspicious the previous day.

[gorckat]

Would MeMe have voted for me, along with another scum (can't remember the name) if I was also scum?

Probably part of the gut against Javert. I remember thinking that earlier on Day 3, but forgot it at some point between then and now.

[neko2086]

Would MeMe have voted for me, along with another scum (can't remember the name) if I was also scum?

Possibly. It's called distancing.

Gorckat, you're right. You would have had to do quite a bit of bussing. I need to go over D1 again, but I can say D2 would have been a very easy bus. Scum would not want to be off that bus, really, because that doesn't look good at all. Actually, you weren't on that bus. You spoke against her, sure, and she voted herself before you'd have had the chance to vote for her. There's really nothing pointing to you being either on or off that bus due to timing issues. Everything is speculation at that point.

So anyway, we now have two people going off of gut and not evidence. This is fantastic. Voting off of gut this late in the game is

not

helpful. Despite being uneasy about Javert, he's currently the most pro-town acting player out of the 3 I see as possible scum.

[gorckat]

So anyway, we now have two people going off of gut and not evidence.

Who's the second?

[neko2086]

Of those two, I'd rather lynch Gorkcat, but I have no particulare evidence against him, just felt that he was a bit suspicious the previous day.

I know I made solid points re: Arakorn, but I think a scum Javert is more likely to get off in endgame than a scum Arakorn, thus I'm going that way. I know its intangible, but its my gut.

[gorckat]

Ah- I was looking for an actual vote.

[neko2086]

Looking over D1 again, I'm not sure I'd believe that if Gorckat was scum, he'd bus his partner so soon. I was the only person voting DR at the time, gorckat was the 2nd. He could very easily have joined a completely different wagon. Now, I don't like the fact that sikario kept giving him "townie points," but I suppose it could just be to gain favor with him. I think he may have been hoping to get me lynched, and at the time, gorckat was voting me. I'm also not a big fan of gorckat's voting style, but I think that's already been addressed. Anyway, those last two concerns are fairly minor when one considers the timing of his vote. Also, Gorckat went pretty far out of his way to try to get some info from Arakorn and help him along when Arakorn was just replacing in. He could have easily pushed for an Arakorn lynch. For now, I'm willing to assume that he's town

So, between Javert and Arakorn, I have to look back again and see what would make most sense. It doesn't help any that Arakorn replaced someone who was absent for 11 pages. It also doesn't help, however, that Arakorn resisted reading those 11 pages, that he jumped onto the Meme and Gorgon wagons with no reasoning (most everyone else at least had reasons to suspect them, regardless of who was pushing the lynch and why), and that he's made no real commitment all game.

vote:

Arakorn

I'm not sold on Javert yet, though. I believe he would be the second lynch.

Soupfly, we need to hear from you.

[neko2086]

ebwop:

vote: Arakorn

in case that didn't count

[Javert]

Trying to find some extra time to reread this game. I will analyze gorckat, Arakorn, and neko2086 separately, in that order. I will not be analyzing soupfly since – as I mentioned before – I will not believe the existence of a mafia inventor who can kill twice on the same night (or would have chosen to role-block Tarhalindur without also killing on that same night).

Note

: I will be gone this Thursday until approximately Sunday.

~~~~~

gorckat

~~ To understand the commentary I give, I would highly suggest clicking the links provided, reading the relevant posts, and then reading my commentary. ~~

The first post 'of note' that I could distinguish was Post 70, where he places the third vote on Archaist (now me) with no explanation. This strikes me more as a gameplay indicator than an alignment indicator.

However, Post 83 has a vote which appears to be stemming from faulty logic (although it may have been done to make a 'point'). The relevant part is this:

Situations in which MeMe could be scum:

One situation, possibly two others

Situations in which soupfly could be scum:

Three situations

If there are more concrete situations where soupfly could be scum than concrete situations where MeMe could be scum, it would make more sense for gorckat to have voted

soupfly

instead of MeMe. This could be potential distancing, and the 'best' sort – there is no way anybody could 'follow' gorckat onto MeMe based on that particular line of logic, but gorckat still gets a 'reasoned' vote against MeMe in the process. Unless he was being facetious, though, he did claim that "his last two votes have been very well thought out" (those being the Archaist and MeMe votes).

Post 99 seems somewhat contrary to the attitude gorckat has been displaying. He claims to be deliberately ignoring questions, but then questions others. Granted, I can agree with "playing with one's cards close to one's chest", but after having MeMe-scum endorse that strategy this game, it could have been an indirect 'defense' of gorckat's posting (in that her saying as much would get others to think better of gorckat's posts than they otherwise would be, without MeMe having to use gorckat's name in such a way that he would seem connected to her).

Another unexplained vote in Post 120 on SirWario, which appears to have an explanation in Post 122, namely "you should have commented more", which is at the very least ironic considering gorckat's lack of commentary up to this point of the game.

A conversation takes place between MeMe and gorckat from Post 132 to Post 135. I've read it through a couple times now, and I've decided it is not indicative of gorckat's alignment either way, but this is the longest conversation between these two that I have seen thus far.

NOTE: It would probably be worth the effort to read this section of the game – namely, starting from page 6/7 – in the view that scum (if they were paying attention) were probably becoming frustrated with their partner, Sikario8. He was making some particularly bad posts, such as Post 128, Post 141, Post 143, Post 163, etc. In my opinion, it is likely that at this point in time, Sikario8's partners would try to pay Sikario8 as little attention as possible, in hopes that others would not push him too hard given his latest posting. I think we can say MeMe, at the very least, did exactly this in her Post 147.

Another unexplained vote in Post 151, this time on neko2086. He gives a vague reasoning in Post 158, and ends his post asking yet

another

player (Archaist) to explain

their

vote while gorckat does the exact opposite. MeMe joins in attacking Archaist in the very next post.

When neko2086 argues that MeMe's vote on RideTheBomb may have been unreasonable, gorckat offers a weak defense in Post 181.

****

My biggest question so far

: It seems pretty clear that at this interval of the game, Sikario8 was doing a good deal of stupid things. Objectively, I would think that – given his posting style which appears in this game – gorckat would have gone after him or voted him (likely without reasons) by this point. Gorckat, can you explain if there was a particular reason you did not vote Sikario8 around this time?

A conversation between gorckat and Sikario8 occurs from Post 193 to about Post 197, where gorckat explains his reasons for voting neko2086. His reasons were as follows:

1.)

"I voted neko because he seemed to say one thing and do another a few times".
-->

Note:

This is unsupported by itself.

2.)

"soupfly pointed out his blandness and hesitancy to voice suspicion, which I'd seen but couldn't verbalize (it was an unconscious cue/read on my part)."
-->

Note:

This reasoning came from soupfly in Post 184.

3.)

"You've caught another inconsistency of the same character as the ones that made me vote him"
-->

Note:

This reasoning came from Sikario8 in Post 196

So far, then, all of gorckat's reasons have come from somebody else first.

Sikario8's Post 203 is a bit confusing, in that he gives gorckat "+5 town points" for saying nothing which has not been said before.

We have a defense for his unexplained neko2086 vote in Post 212. He falls back on the question "Do you expect each vote to have original reasons to back it up?". I think the answer is

yes

, especially if you are the first person to vote somebody.

****

Question

: When you are the first person to vote somebody, would you agree that you ought to have original reasons?
****

Question

: Now that it is later in the game, for what reasons did you choose not to

explain

your 'reasons' early in the game?

Finally get an elaboration in Post 220. This is actually a good post – the only

problem

is that there is no way of telling whether or not gorckat

actually

had these reasons in mind when he voted neko2086, or if he compiled them during the long period he had to think of reasoning. He tosses in another reason in Post 246.

An explanation for the Archaist vote Post 273, which is precisely how I would expect

anybody

to explain that particular vote (i.e. for bandwagon/pressure reasons).

Okay, I have to leave for dinner, I just finished reading up to page 11 under the gorckat analysis. I will try to finish when I can find time.

[gorckat]

Crap Logic

On my early posts, especially 83- purposeful poking for reactions, which led to more discussion, and eventually enough to lynch Sik/DR on.

For not voting sikario early- he was pushing in the same directions I was leaning (at least as far as SirWario and neko), iirc.

I note a few instances where you find my reactions or comments to be either what you'd expect anyone else to do, or not pushing one way or the other.

It looks like you want to swamp the others with 'evidence' in hopes I lynch easily.

[neko2086]

Gorckat, what exactly about Javert's post makes it crap logic? Is it crap logic just because you say so?

It looks like you want to swamp the others with 'evidence' in hopes I lynch easily.

It looks like you're trying to deflect suspicion from yourself. Seriously, if we're not supposed to provide evidence, what are we doing here?

[Javert]

gorckat, the purpose of my last post is both for myself and others; I am pointing out all things I find especially notable about you. My post is not strictly a 'case' on you -- if I find something I think looks particularly protown about a post of yours (or a protown habit I have noticed), I will point it out and take it into consideration. If you feel I am not being thorough or not representing you correctly, please point that out.

When I can find time (not sure when that will be -- I will be disgustingly busy this week), I will finish my analysis. And then I will do an analysis on Arakorn. And then I will do an analysis on neko2086. Depending on how many things I find worthy of note, those two analysis might be just as long as the one I have partially done on you. The length of posts has nothing to do with anything: I am somewhat infamous for having long posts, and that is just the way I play.

I would prefer for this game to be won in the cleanest fashion possible -- I would like to lynch scum

today

and have the game over with. To do that, I need to decide who I think is the most likely person to be scum, and to do

that

I need to analyze all of my options and choose the best of them. If you have an alternate method of making this decision, feel free to enlighten me.

[gorckat]

Is it crap logic just because you say so?

Have you read through it all and come to your own conclusions?

[neko2086]

I have read it, and I think he's got some valid points. I also noticed that Meme distanced herself from Sikario. The first part of D2 before Tar claimed I asked her why she didn't mention Sikario at all D1. She claimed she did, but only once and it was a very minor point.

Is there a connection between you and MeMe? I have to go back and reread under that assumption to see if it makes sense.

He also mentions your voting habits, which I haven't liked since D1.

Actually, I find little fault with the majority of his post. Whether it points to you as scum or not, I'm not sure yet. I've only taken them as his observations so he certainly hasn't convinced me of anything on his own.

That said, your reaction is what I find most interesting. You immediately became defensive. It was pretty clear to me that he was going to do the same thing for both Arakorn and I. You've also avoided a couple of his questions, which were bolded, which I assume means that he would like them answered.

Some people say WOWs are a scumtell. I don't know about this. It seems like the town usually invests most energy into a game, while the scum like to blend into the scenery, or lurk without appearing to be lurking. WOWs are much the opposite, and in my opinion, they point to townieness. If you disagree, and have some sort of reasoning that you'd like to use, I'll be glad to listen.