NY 174: Oldy Mafia 2 (Game Over)

[undo]

It is such an honor to be here playing with so many legends of this site.

VOTE: DrippingGoofball by way of homage.

[undo]

Serious vote.

And would you like to elaborate on your motives?

[undo]

@Undo - How did you feel about the previous wagons of MafiaSSK and Tigris?

MafiaSSK's wagon is solely based on his post 45, which doesn't look right to me either -- it seems to be advocating unanimism and discouraging a simultaneous search for multiple targets, something I strongly disagree with, especially in this stage of the game -- but for now I don't see more there than a polemic theoretical opinion.

Regarding Tigris, there's nothing scummy about him applying the old (albeit admittedly obsolete) "3rd vote" rule of thumb, so I dismiss Tigris's wagon as something fetched to get out of RVS.

To sum up, both wagons are 'meh' to me and I'd really rather look into other players (this should also address STD's disquiet).

And would you like to elaborate on your motives?

Wow I don't remember you at all.

Way to circumvent my question.

[undo]

I agree with CTD that chamber's alignment is fairly obvious at this point.

Please tell us where exactly CTD expressed the obviousness of chamber's alignment.

Defending both SSK and tigras, the two leading bandwagons, and going after people like LML, PJ, and Seol all at once is an incredibly ballsy move, and I don't really see why you would stick your neck out like that so far, so early in the game, based on so little.

Wouldn't that 'balsiness' make VitaminR more probable to be town?

What does he have to gain by buddying with CTD, if they are both scum?

Actually, MafiaSSK hasn't clearly stated whether he thought CTD was scum or whether he was just making a point about the relevance of RVs (again, a quite controversial opinion). Can you enlighten us, MafiaSSK?

words words words I forgot how much FUN it is to play in mafia games where people actually talk through their reasonings.

IKR ;D

Oh, and meanwhile UNVOTE: DGB

[undo]

@MafiaSSK: Nevermind, I just read your post better and you clearly state you think CES and CTD are partners, and both scummy. In that case, STD is right, you're not making any sense.

[undo]

As for CTD-CES, often times in games without daytalk it is beneficial for a scum to remark on their partner's posts and let them know in a discreet way if they are in support or against the direction that they are going in.

I found the association tell in CES' opinion on chamber and as such I believe the two could be scum partners. Again, I could totally be wrong on this, but this is what I believe.

Really? Excusing your hardly logical reasoning with belief?

Just to make it clear, in your view, CES saying "I agree with CTD that chamber's alignment is fairly obvious at this point" right after CTD's posts (and even though CTD didn't make it clear he thought chamber was obvscum) is a

discreet way

of showing agreement to a scum partner.

Honestly, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt about that RV-wagon theory, but you just keep on coming out with some outlandish reasonings I frankly wouldn't expect from an oldie.

I'm going to VOTE: MafiaSSK after all.

VOTE: VitaminR, because:
- Yosarian's Post 108.

After MafiaSSK, you're the second person taking this post as sacred. I'm starting to feel stupid for still not understanding how Yosarian's argument against VitR wouldn't as easily be used to dismiss him as a townie.

In other news, I'm going to Paris tomorrow and I shan't be back until Seol has been lynched (or next Saturday, one of the two). My hotel'll have wifi access, so it shouldn't be too bad V/LAwise.

Bon voyage ! Entretemps, tu peux répondre à ma question, s'il te plaît ?

I believe in the LML wagon.

Why?

[undo]

I'm really not understanding the continuing pushing of the mafiaSSK wagon. I feel like he has addressed pretty much everything that has been put before him. I don't agree with all his assertions but the guy feels genuine and seems to be attempting to figure out the game.

Addressing what is put in front of you doesn't automatically make you innocent.

Well that's a hyperbolic mischaracterization of my reaction to Yosarian's post if I've ever seen one.

Of course it is -- it was a tongue-in-cheek remark, I thought that was clear. Still don't get how that is a strong argument against VitR though.

I believe in the LML wagon.

Why?

Albert B. Rampage, please answer the question.

[undo]

This is a scum post.

Interesting. What exactly strikes you as scummy in ABR's post, chamber?

[undo]

Hey. I'm back. Half asleep, but back.

I'm getting some weird vibes off of Undo's posting so far this game. Kind of wishy-washy. Kisses up to everyone in first post, votes DGB "as homage". ? Says MafiaSSK's post #45 " doesn't look right", but then hedges that read, and doesn't vote. Takes off random vote on DGB without voting anyone else. Then later votes SSK. fos:Undo Posting and voting pattern so far looks overly cautious.

May I recommend you to get some sleep then? Your acumen seems to be impaired

No, but seriously, you've just made a chronological list of some of my actions in this game. What's actually suspicious about them? The fact that I am excited to be playing this game (shame on you for dismissing my sincere first post as fawning!)? The fact that I don't vote when I don't find anything immediately voteworthy?

Not everyone plays the same way. I for one don't follow my gut. I don't go voting or fosing people without having minimally solid arguments to do it. If you take one action that I find dubious but not necessarily scummy, I'll take note of it for myself. If you keep on acting dubiously, I will have reasons to find you scummy and evidence to justify my read.

I've been asking questions to several players (some of which remain unresponded) to collect material, so to speak -- but until I form anything valid and concrete from that material, I keep my votes to myself.

VitimanR's move is only "ballsy" because if SSK or Tigras flip scum eventually, he looks linked to them, and it creates a lot of confusion. My suggestion was that VitimanR's move would be a lot less risky if he already knew SSK's and Tigras's alignment.

I see what you mean. So considering you think VitR is scum, are you townreading LML, PJ, and Seol?

His votes don't inspire trust.

How so?

This is insulting. If you don't want to read the game, please replace out. There are others who would be happy to take your slot.

Natirasha is a new-school player, that's just what they do. I guess he's going through culture shock here. Amirite Nati? ;D

@chamber: why is ABR scum?

[undo]

In general, your play thus far looked overly cautious for day 1, like you were trying extra hard to stay on good terms with everyone. If there's any point at all to random voting, it's to try to create pressure or get something moving early in the game, but you placed your random vote in such a way as to make sure it didn't create any pressure, and the you dropped it without explaining why and without voting anyone else, at a time when no one else was voting DGB. You seemed to imply that you thought SSK was suspicious, but would rather vote for nobody then vote for him; you then voted for him eventually, but you seemed hesitant to do so, and joined the wagon fairly late. (In fact, i would say that SSK actually looked less scummy when you voted him then he did when you declined to do so). Your first comment about SSK seemed kind of wishy-washy, trying to both say you understood why he looked suspicious while negating that in the same sentence.

Eh, I am not sure you have understood my posts then, because you're distorting their significance.

If there's any point at all to random voting, it's to try to create pressure or get something moving early in the game, but you placed your random vote in such a way as to make sure it didn't create any pressure, and the you dropped it without explaining why and without voting anyone else, at a time when no one else was voting DGB

The point of random voting is subject of much debate, as we have already observed in this game. I don't care much for RV, so I saw it as a compliment opportunity. I eventually dropped it because it was no longer valid (it was a RV, remember) -- and I thought that was pretty clear.

You seemed to imply that you thought SSK was suspicious, but would rather vote for nobody then vote for him

You are referring to my post 115, where I

never

implied I thought SSK was suspicious. When I said "it didn't look right to me", I was saying I didn't agree with his theory -- his theory didn't look right to me -- but that defending one controversial theory about RVS was not enough for me to find him scummy.

you then voted for him eventually, but you seemed hesitant to do so, and joined the wagon fairly late. (In fact, i would say that SSK actually looked less scummy when you voted him then he did when you declined to do so)

I voted for him because between one post and another, he kept on coming out with some hardly defensable conjectures (I'm mainly referring to his posts 156 and 173). When he said he thought CES's post 137 (and I invite you to read it again) was scum

discreetly

showing agreement with a scum partner, he really just seemed desperate to come up with any connection, any valid suspicion that could shake off the heat he had on him.

I can't really understand how you (or any others who agree with you) can think MafiaSSK looked more scummy before those posts. In my opinion, his first posts were too isolated to indicate scumminess. But when he just kept on acting dubiously, he started to be readable in a whole other light.

As I've told you, I vote when I have reasons to do it. I've got my eyes on some players more than others, but for the moment, MafiaSSK is the one player who gave me more justifiable reasons to be suspicious of -- that's why my vote is currently on him. It's as simple as that.

[undo]

If you want to be annoying, Nat, can you at least be a bit respectful about it?

More votes for Seol, please.

So how's Paris, CES? You still haven't responded to my question, by the way.

Ok. How would you distinguish between "SSK is acting scummy" and "SSK has a very different view on mafia theory and scumhunting tactics then I do" here? I certainly agree that looking for association tells on day 1 between random people seems like a bizzare way to scumhunt, but I'm not really understanding the scum motivation here, or why you think that's more likely to come from scum then town.

It's one thing to have different views on scumhunting tactics, it's another to say that a post which explicitly states "I agree with the person who posted right before me" is discreet. There's not much room for different opinions there. As I've said before, it looks like MafiaSSK was desperate to find some kind of association that could divert the negative attention he was getting and at the same time make him look like he was scumhunting and contributing positively. Only he just calls even more negative attention to himself when he does that in such an absurd way (at least in my view).

[undo]

I agree with the thrust of this argument. MafiaSSK clearly misread CES's statement and when this was pointed out to him, instead of admitting his mistake, he tried to spin his argument so that he could maintain the "associative tell" between us. This does not look like legitimate scumhunting to me.

Summed it well. Also, notice that it wasn't the first time MafiaSSK did it. As PJ pointed out earlier, SSK had already pushed his random-bandwagon theory so that he could justify his vote on Tigris. Now, as I said, it is excusable if it happens once, but insisting on the same hurtful behavior over and over again becomes gravely suspicious.

Back in my day, as I was joining mafiascum.net and waving to one of the dinosaurs outside my window because dinosaurs ruled the earth (seriously. A lot of people don't know the Jurassic Park movies are actually documentaries) when we replaced in, we took the time to read the entire thread, even if it was tens of pages long. And our posts weren't just one liners, we were pretty monstrous about our verbosity. The first dozen pages of this game are pretty tame.

I remember that, people still played like that when I joined, during the Cretacious. When I came back to the site, a few months ago, I was sadly surprised to realize that dinosaurs were all but extinct, and so was loquacity. I ignore at what exact moment the meta-eorite has fallen, but the truth is that it turned those mammal one-liners into the new rulers, and the remaining reptilians had to adapt to survive. Natirasha was the first to introduce me to this new reality after I returned, that's why I am now (affectionately!) taunting him.

@PJ, Poro, CTD and undo, you have somewhat similar reasons for voting SSK. I haven't read the guy in other games yet--have you? I want to know whether these odd behaviors you've noted are scumtells of his, or as Sotty has alluded to, are hallmarks of his overall loose/"lynchable" play. If you believe that one or more of these behaviors are genuine tells for him in particular, please elaborate.

I don't recall ever playing with MafiaSSK before.

undo: so many words, so few suspicions. reasoning on ssk is over the top about ssk's over-the-topness.

Do you measure towniness by quantity of suspicions? And how is my reasoning over-the-top?

@chamber:

Still expecting an answer to my question about ABR.

[undo]

Oh really? Why?

[undo]

Expecting an answer that's not coming doesn't seem -not- silly?

Rough talk there.

chamber and CES, is there any reason why you refuse to respond to my queries?

[undo]

@Untrod Tripod: do you think VitR and LML can be scum together or are your reads on them mutually exclusive?

---

Since it was such a weak wagon and Seol didn't come in snarling and ripping people aside, he must be scum with a guilty conscience, right?

(Note: not entirely serious here.)

Why did you feel the need to make that safeguard? Are you or are you not voting Seol because you think he's scum?

---
Meanwhile, I just wanted to note for the record that CES has implied he thinks chamber is scum, and chamber has implied he thinks ABR is scum, but both appear to be reluctant to elaborate on those suspicions.

[undo]

Limited access until Monday, but I will try to post something substantive on the weekend.

[undo]

No time for a long post, so I’ll just leave some quick notes for now. Tomorrow I’ll be able to do a thorough read of the last pages and post a more complete analysis.

@Yosarian

I'm equally confused by people like Glork for apparently expecting me to stick with a page 5 suspicion for the rest of the game, and claims to find it opportunistic that I switched to a better suspect when I had more information. Just weird play, I don't get it.

That last post of pj really sets alarm bells ringing for me, particularly the opportunistic jump on LML

Are you equally confused by VitaminR for apparently expecting PJ to stick with a page 3 suspicion for the rest of the game, and claiming to find it opportunistic that he switched to a better suspect when he had more information? Is VitaminR playing weird?

@LML

He is pushing names into an Excel document and focusing on the outliers in one direction (lots of vote changing) but not the other direction (lack of vote changing).

If you would have read my posts closely (which I assume you haven't, because this is sloppy mistake #2 from you), you would have read this:

d) Why not let everyone else do that? You guys can go after the lurker tells (I don't believe in them) and I look to actively scum hunt.

That was the reasoning as to why I don't like lurker tells.

LML, you know good and well that lurkers ≠ people who don’t change their votes a lot (vide: me, for example). Since I know you’re aware of this, I can only assume you’re purposedly ignoring this fundamental difference just to make PJ look bad, which doesn’t seem very honest (and looks OMGUS).

---

Meanwhile, MafiaSSK is looking worse and worse by the clock. Some pages ago he was all posting long texts defending eccentric theories more backed by “belief” than reason. Now he’s lurking and asks us to entertain him.

Also, hey Bookitty! Good to see you here. I can’t help but notice your entrance in the game was rather inconspicuous, though, without the customary après-reread analysis wallpost. I’d really like to hear your reads on people.

[undo]

Enjoy my second serving of loose notes. They mainly concern pp. 15-20, because I’m still catching up on the last couple of pages.

De Yosarian

Consistency is a scum tell.

I really can’t let this pass without making a comment. I hope you were being hyperbolic for rhetorical purposes, because otherwise that is a very dangerous aphorism. I mean, you could say "Consistency is not a town tell" or "Trying too hard to be consistent (vide MafiaSSK...) is a scum tell". But saying "consistency is a scum tell" is a gross simplification and also potentially misleading. Inconsistency (that is, the lack of coherence in one's reasoning and reaction patterns) is the primal indicator of a latent dishonesty. If your post history shows signs of core changes in your frame of thought, you undoubtedly are more likely to be scum.

De Zorblag

After his first analyses I was going to jump on the Zorblag-is-town wagon, until I saw STD’s 377. I must say this contribution has granted STD a solid place in my town list.

I also don’t like Zorblag's jump on the Porochaz wagon. About Green Canyons, Zorblag insists “That’s how I would play as scum”; about Porochaz, he says “I know that he's busy, but I don't feel like he's caring.“ Zorblag seems to suggest GC is scummier than Porochaz, but between the active poster and the lurker, he chooses the latter to vote. Indeed, lurkers are less likely to give you trouble, while GC is well able to present a strong defense.

De LML

Rationale:
[*]UT has been on 3 of the major bandwagons, the most out of any player (tied with StD)
[*]UT was also on the Nat wagon which looked incredibly opportunistic at the time.

Unless you’re suggesting he’s playing the “too scummy to be scummy” card, I don’t see why UT-scum would openly jump from wagon to wagon like that.

But soon after this you chose to vote PJ, yet with some more weak points to support your case. Besides the lumping of lurkers and “self-controlled voters”, which I already mentioned in my last post, you also say this:

Point 4: Your bluster at ABR was very odd. That was especially odd because he was VOTING ME AT THE TIME, and how you've "had nagging suspicions of me" does not compute. You wouldn't bluster at him for voting me if you actually had those nagging suspicions. I think you're lying. Or posturing. You're not being forthcoming regardless.

So just because ABR was voting LML, PJ couldn’t suspect both? I can’t really see where’s the reasoning behind this. It’s too early to make associations and steer our suspicions accordingly. If A votes B and I suspect B, that’s not a reason for me not to suspect A. I mean, there are many reasons to suspect a player -- PJ’s suspicion on ABR was not based on his vote, but on the content of one of his posts (which was later cleared off).

De Bookitty

It really doesn’t do you any favors that your first relevant post after you replaced in was to jump on the biggest wagon of the game (other than the wagon on yourself, of course) – and with a very questionable argument too (mainly this: “In a game this size with this many players, wouldn't it make more sense NOT to put in the effort to do that analysis if LML was scum?”).

I’m holding further action on you until I see your promised catch-up analysis and reads.

[undo]

Free at last! Here are my final notes on the last pages:

@Yosarian

, my question still stands: do you think VitR’s play is as weird as Glork’s (refer to my post 517)?

~~~~

Bookitty, a summary

Bookitty enters the game and hops on the biggest wagon (PJ). Then, when questioned about her stance on LML, she writes a vague and neutral post, where she basically says: He may be scum because he unvoted STD to vote UT for the same reason [not entirely true, and not exactly a scumtell]; he may be town because people are voting him without reason [so she doesn’t think he’s town because of his own actions].

Then she proceeds with her analysis of the whole game (posts 560, 566 and 572), where the only open suspicion she states is on PJ. The feeling we get is that she went through the whole game just to gather everything she could to corroborate her vote. Besides that, she almost only talks assertively about her townreads -- like Shanba and SSK, now mathcam -- or the posts she likes.

There’s only one post she openly “HATES”, a post from LML in response to VitaminR. Actually, there’s an interesting coupling going on between Bookitty and VitaminR:

VitaminR starts attracting some votes, I don’t really get why

Okay, I HATE this: Post 279 VitaminR makes some really good points about LML and instead of saying anything relevant back, he says: "To be completely fair again, a LOT of people went alone with two weak wagons. Hell, some of the people you've quite ignored have actually BEEN on 3 or 4 wagons thus far. Why have they earned a pass from you?" To me that's deflection. That's scummy and I didn't notice it before or I forgot it. VitaminR and LML go back and forth and VitaminR wins that.

chamber, what is your issue with Bookitty? I feel like she's been pretty on the money with her posts about PJ (especially Post 495 is basically exactly why I'm voting PJ).

I'm still not really getting what's so scummy about Bookitty's recent posts, perhaps because I mostly agree with her. I guess she seems nervous, but that could just be replacement jitters.

Speaking of “replacement jitters”… There's another thing that draws attention into Bookitty’s posts:

I hadn't thought about it the way Glork did, but

the truth is that Glork is a better scumhunter than I am. (I'm sure those who have played with me before will back me up on this.)

And no, you don't need to worry about being condescending,

I don't have a huge ego about my scumhunting prowess

.

I just got here. Do you truly expect someone who replaced in late on Friday night to have had time to do what you suggest?

Sorry for the delay in responding

.

Yes, I’m nervous

. I haven’t played for several years, I’m rusty and I am playing with people whose opinions I value. It’s an unnerving combination.

I don’t want to make a fool of myself.

I’m not alone in finding this game hard to figure out and hard to remember

.

Is it okay if I continue this? It's really helpful to me in remembering all my reasons for why I thought things, so I'm going to do it anyway.

But if you want me not to post these ungodly long blocks of text, I can stop whenever.

The cherry:

Oh, someone asked me if I hated playing scum (I don’t remember who and my head is too fuzzy to go looking through the thread for it) –

the answer is yeah, I don’t like playing scum. I prefer doing long analysis thingies and trying to pick out connections. It’s mostly something I’m better at after a few flips, though.

I mean, there’s “replacement jitters” and there’s straight appeal to emotion. These are levels of insecurity I don’t expect from a person who has played her fair share of mafia games – unless she is scum, of course.

~~~~

And now for Mathcam

Mathcam’s entrance is another fragile one. Let’s look at his first post (587):

• After rereading the whole thread, he chooses to keep his predecessor’s vote (which is based on a weak reasoning):

  So I'm happy with SSK's vote on CES, even if I disagree with some of how he got there. I'll leave it there with the hope that there's some agreement or discussion on this topic, and we work on moving the bandwagons here.

• He’s afraid to post his town reads on people:

  I have a list of people I think are probably town, but I'm not sure it does anyone any good to reveal them

• And he’s unable to explain his “slight” scumreads:

  I have slight scum reads on both LML and BooKitty […], though I can't say that I can particularly well point to places in the text where either have said anything that really triggered a negative reaction from me

And suddenly, in his following post (594), after a clarification on CES by VitaminR, his slight scumread on Bookitty turns into a vote (on the biggest bandwagon of the game) with no further explanation:

Ahhhhh. Apparently, along with MafiaSSK's role, apparently I also inherited his failed sarcasmometer. Oops.
Unvote: CES, Vote: BooKitty

~~~~

I thought whether I should keep my vote on mathcam or switch it to Bookitty. I still hold mathcam as a top suspect, because MafiaSSK theories+mathcam’s expressed reluctance to assuming his stances is a killer combo. But Bookitty has the most momentum going on, so VOTE: Bookitty. If a matcham wagon forms during the following days, though, I’m there. (Also, if someone was going to ask, I don’t think the fact that he is voting for Bookitty changes anything)

[undo]

Anyway, this all to say I’m good with being lynched. I don’t think it’s great that the day drag on and on, so if any of you were swayed by my

“appeals to emotion” (end sarcasm)

don’t be. We need to move on and I’m willing to be the lynch if it gets that accomplished.

Yeah, you say that... in a post where you basically play the martyr card.

I'm going to be honest here: I don't like martyr speeches at all. If you really are town, fight for your life. Prove to us that your lynch is unfair. Do something other than "Yeah that's fine, lynch me, I'm more valuable dead anyways". Because I tell you that's not pro-town behaviour.

Undo: It strikes me that your last post on me was taking things I said and then claiming as though these were observations you sussed out from my post. The only difference is that you replace charitable ones with uncharitable ones (e.g., "I don't think revealing my town reads would be helpful" vs. "mathcam is afraid to reveal his town reads", and "here is one scumread I can't justify" to "mathcam can't even justify his slight scumreads").

FOS: Undo

for that.

That's right, you were quite obvious in your reluctance to express your reads. Of course, as scum, you will sugarcoat it and say it's for the sake of the game, but for me it just looks like a way of masking your inability to form strong opinions.

One thing I did observe though: in your first post you said you were happy with your predecessor's vote on CES and that you had a slight scumread on Bookitty; in your second post, after a clarification from VitaminR, you promptly unvoted CES and voted Bookitty without further explanation.

Also, I've noticed you like to FOS people who openly express suspicions on you or your predecessor.

[

V/LA until June 14

. I will probably be able to post every now and then during this time, but not in-depth analyses]

[undo]

Just stopping by to express my disappointment with Bookitty's wagon losing steam.

@Porochaz: thanks man.

[undo]

My vote stays where it is.

[undo]

Just came back from my vacation. I will definitely post something substantive tomorrow.

[undo]

I intend to do a series of rereads of the game, focusing on the interactions between LML and other players. In this first stage, I am mainly trying to find solid townreads, which will allow me to proceed by process of elimination.

So here is a list of players I am now considering as town (therefore players I’m not willing to lynch, at least in the short to medium term):

Stronger Townreads

VitaminR

– one of the most active LML-hunters since early game. He began attacking LML in post 65, where he states his suspicions explicitly (“Seems like something scum might do to make sure that two wagons keep momentum”). In post 84 he keeps pushing that suspicion. Later, in post 253, VitR expresses his will to keep his vote on LML as “the LML wagon is finally building up a little bit.” From post 279 to 282, LML and VitR engage in a back-and-forth discussion I can’t see two scum partners having.

Green Canyons

– votes LML with a strong, logical case in post 307.

petroleumjelly

– his suspicions/vote on LML came late (comparing to VitR, for example) in post 419. However, he was the target of an aggressive (albeit poorly constructed) case by LML (post 451), which indicates LML was actively trying to lynch him.

Townreads

ABR

– he too pushed for LML votes early on, but unlike VitR, he didn’t present any solid motives for it. Still, he generally advocated for his lynch during the game. Plus, he was attacked by LML in post 110.

Save the Dragons

– STD was the first serious vote of LML (post 110). After this, STD expressed some suspicions on LML, votes him (without any rationale, though) and later exchanges some arguments with him (eg post 285).

Yosarian

– He votes LML in post 379, but he lacks conviction. Later on he says LML is “still the best choice” for a lynch (post 546).

A note about UT

: UT voted LML in post 224, but with no rational justification. LML voted him in post 371, but his case was “formulaic” and softly presented (he was not aggressive as he was later with PJ, for example). Can’t townread UT based on his interactions with LML.

----

Second phase of my analysis coming soon.

On another note, I noticed DGB wrote “I've already found scum in LML” in her first post. I wonder if this can help us determine her alignment.

[undo]

b) Glork ended up on the LML lynch, so he is a smaller "don't lynch LML" advocate than ABR by default.

Glork jumped on the LML wagon immediately after the "bus" slip. Two posts before he was still saying "lynch anyone not named Glork, ABR, Bookitty, DGB, or Porochaz, and possibly LmL". Relevant course of events, methinks.

Second phase of my LML interactions analysis coming in about 12 hours.

[undo]

In this second phase of my D1 analysis, I focused on distancing. Even though the game is chockfull of experienced players, distancing is a standard scum procedure, one which was certainly carried out by some players in this game.

The aim of this analysis

is not to confirm townreads

, but to determine which players kept the most distance from LML during D1, for probability of finding scum will be higher among those players.

Thus, I combed through the whole game (until LML’s lynch) and assigned points to players every time they mentioned or interacted with LML. I then looked through LML’s posts and did the same every time he mentioned or interacted with other players.

Point system:

• Neutral mentions [NM] and direct interactions [DI] (such as asking questions or replying to them) = 1 point
  
• Attacks/explicit suspicions [AS] (including expressed willingness to lynch player) = 2 points

Positive mentions, townreads, votes and FoSes are acknowledged, but not considered for the point count.

These are my results:

VERY FREQUENTLY INTERACTED WITH LML (20+ points)

• Yosarian2 (28 points)
  • ON LML -- [8 NM, 4 AS, 3 DI] + [1 vote]
    
  • BY LML -- [4 NM, 1 AS, 3 DI]
  petroleumjelly (26 points)
  • ON LML -- [1 NM, 6 AS, 5 DI] + [2 votes]
    
  • BY LML -- [3 NM, 2 AS, 1 DI] + [1 vote]
  Green Crayons (25 points)
  • ON LML -- [5 NM, 5 AS, 4 DI] + [1 vote]
    
  • BY LML -- [1 NM, 1 AS, 3 DI] + [1 FoS]
  Untrod Tripod (21 points)
  • ON LML -- [4 NM, 4 AS, 1 DI] + [2 votes (one of them L-1)]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 4 AS, 0 DI] + [1 vote]

OFTEN INTERACTED WITH LML (12-20 points)

• VitaminR (18 points)
  • ON LML -- [2 NM, 3 AS, 4 DI] + [3 votes]
    
  • BY LML -- [1 NM, 5 AS, 0 DI] + [1 positive mention]
  Save the Dragons (18 points)
  • ON LML -- [2 NM, 2 AS, 2 DI] + [2 votes]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 5 AS, 0 DI] + [1 vote]
  Sotty7 (15 points)
  • ON LML -- [1 NM, 2 AS, 3 DI]
    
  • BY LML -- [1 NM, 2 AS, 2 DI]
  Albert B Rampage (13 points)
  • ON LML -- [2 NM, 3 AS, 0 DI] + [2 votes] + [2 positive mentions]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 1 AS, 3 DI] + [1 positive mention]

SELDOM INTERACTED WITH LML (5-11 points)

• Porochaz (10 points)
  • ON LML -- [2 NM, 3 AS, 0 DI] + [1 vote]
    
  • BY LML -- [1 NM, 0 AS, 1 DI]
  Bookitty (10 points)
  • ON LML -- [5 NM, 2 AS, 0 DI] + [1 vote]
    
  • BY LML -- [1 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI]
  Kublai Khan (9 points)
  • ON LML -- [0 NM, 3 AS, 0 DI] + [1 vote]
    
  • BY LML -- [1 NM, 1 AS, 0 DI] + [2 votes]
  mathcam (9 points)
  • ON LML -- [2 NM, 1 AS, 1 DI]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 2 AS, 0 DI] + [1 FoS] + [1 positive mention]
  CrashTextDummie (8 points)
  • ON LML -- [2 NM, 0 AS, 2 DI] + [1 vote (hammer)]
    
  • BY LML -- [2 NM, 1 AS, 0 DI] + [1 FoS]
  undo (8 points)
  • ON LML -- [0 NM, 2 AS, 3 DI]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 0 AS, 1 DI] + [1 positive mention]
  MrBuddyLee (6 points)
  • ON LML -- [3 NM, 1 AS, 1 DI] + [1 vote]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI] + [1 positive mention]

ALMOST NEVER INTERACTED WITH LML (0-4 points)

• Cogito Ergo Sum (4 points)
  • ON LML -- [0 NM, 1 AS, 0 DI]
    
  • BY LML -- [2 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI]
  chamber (3 points)
  • ON LML -- [0 NM, 0 AS, 1 DI] + [1 positive mention]
    
  • BY LML -- [1 NM, 0 AS, 1 DI] + [2 positive mentions]
  inHimshallibe (2 points)
  • ON LML -- [2 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI] + [1 positive mention]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI] + [1 positive mention]
  DrippingGoofball (1 point)
  • ON LML -- [1 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI] + [1 vote] + [2 positive mentions]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI] + [1 positive mention]
  Glork (1 point)
  • ON LML -- [1 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI] + [3 positive mentions]
    
  • BY LML -- [0 NM, 0 AS, 0 DI] + [2 positive mentions]

---

Please note:

I am aware this system is not precise and objective – it was not intended to be so. It’s just a way of helping me (and hopefully some of you) look into the right players.

I have yet to analyse this results and interpret them in depth -- I will do it as soon as possible, but for now I’m not making any comment because I don't want to be rash. This may not bring anything new to your table but I personally felt I needed to do this to be sure about my next steps.

[undo]

Hey you didn't count this!

You’re right, I’m sorry. You actually helped me identify a sign of inconsistency in your play with that, so thanks for pointing it out.

On to my analysis of the most LML-distanced players:

Chamber

• During Day1, he buddies up CES – he speaks in behalf of CES, he answers questions directed at CES (interestingly, he gets upset when someone answers questions he asks to other people). Like CES, he too insists that people vote Seol based on his only 2-3 early posts, and tunnels on that slot until the end of the game.
  
  However, I feel that he has been generally consistent and pertinent, and apart from tunneling on Seol/Bookitty, I can’t find any damning scumtell in his play.
  
  
  Verdict:
  not a priority for now.

CES

• Just like chamber, tunnels on Seol-slot the entire Day 1 (since page 3!). Almost never presents reasons for this obsession and isn’t clear about many of his statements.
  
  From the last days of D1 and on to D2, he has been more consistent and helpful, though.
  
  
  Verdict:
  not a priority for now.

inHimshallibe/zorblag

• In his first analysis posts, Zorblag is says he doesn’t find anything anti-town about LML. In his follow-up post, he doesn’t mention LML except to discreetly defend him by saying “I disagree with a lot of the motivations for wagonning that LoudmouthLee is working from, but at least I think he's working.”
  
  Then Zorblag follows DGB and jumps on the Porochaz wagon. As I’ve said earlier, I find it suspicious that Zorblag had previously suggested he thought GC was scummier than Porochaz, but he chose to vote the one who would be less prone to defend himself.
  
  After three days of inactivity, Zorblag give his first opinion on the Bookitty wagon (as a response to DGB’s question), saying he has “no issue” with the votes on Bookitty.
  Zorblag’s last action before replacing out was to reply to another DGB question.
  
  inHimshallibe replaced in before LML’s lynch, but didn’t post until much later, two days after the beginning of Day 2. His entrance is similar to Nat’s (refusing to read D1, for instance), but curiously no-one rose up against this. He then votes CTD just because he said he would post and he didn’t. He has just been posting one-liners ever since and not exactly being an active contributor.
  
  
  Verdict:
  Zorblag was cautious about LML, and inHimshallibe isn't being helpful at all.
  FoS: inHimshallibe

Glork

• Already on page 3 LML says Glork is a definite town read. I don’t think LML would buddy up his own scumpartner so early in the game (even if he seems to be jocose).
  
  Glork passively defends LML on page 5, and on page 18 he does it again by saying he is not enthusiastic about his wagon. And he keeps defending LML reguarly after that (“I've literally been saying this whole time that I'm not a fan of the recent LML-hate because I don't see the scum motivation. You're telling me there are reasons (ie, motivation) for scum making that vote. I'm calling you out on those reasons.”)
  
  The way he strongly defends LML, and the fact that LML stated Glork was a town read from early on, makes me think they are not scumpartners. His post 1134 is fair.
  
  But then I can’t help but notice Glork’s posts reveal some inconsistencies like:
  Posts 523, 593: “As much as it pains me to say, I'm pretty fine with a Bookitty lynch.” “I'm like 80% sure that I will be voting to lynch Bookitty or PJ today. I just really can't decide which.”
  Post 641: “I've been by and large pretty fine with Bookitty's contributions.” And after this post he proceeds to strongly defend Bookitty.
  
  His vote on CES at the end of D1 seems to be a rage-vote and not because he thinks CES is scummy. Shortly after, he jumps on KK, voting him just because he made one game-irrelevant post, and saying he “needs to die as soon as possible” (this was a few hours before deadline). This doesn’t make Glork look good.
  
  Then Glork, who said he was not willing to lynch LML, immediately votes LML after the ‘bus’ slip, but it’s difficult to figure his alignment based on this move only.
  
  Glork’s Day2 theory about VitR is interesting but too speculative IMO.
  
  
  Verdict:
  I have mixed feelings about Glork, but I’m leaning town for the moment.

DGB

• DGB’s very first post still puzzles me. “I’ve already found scum in LML”, she says. Is it possible this was a lucky coincidence? It seems unlikely, but it also seems unlikely that she, as scum, would out her partner in such an retroactively obvious way.
  
  During D1 she is generally difficult to read as she almost only writes posts following the template “___ is town”. An interesting exception is when she suggests that the scumteam is Porochaz, LML and PJ; but she soon dropped the LML suspicion and proceeded to vote Porochaz, who because of family problems was an easy target at that time (DGB’s rationale: “The combination of RL excuses and the posting style prior to said excuses smell of scum avoiding the game”, which was a very disagreeable thing to say).
  
  Later in Day 1, after unsuccessfully trying to convince people to vote UT, 7 hours before deadline she votes KK, who only had 2 votes (LML quickly followed suit) – thus placing her vote in a safe wagon which she knew wouldn’t lead to any lynch that day.
  
  Day 2, DGB’s play has been mostly erratic – playing the victim, voting people just because others say it. But her role-fishing move page 44 is downright terrible and can only be described as anti-town behavior. One could say it is borderline excusable because it could just be a strategy to catch mathcam off-guard. But then DGB actually seems to think ABR is a cop (“ABR is so obvious, Sherlock. I didn't "reveal" anything”, she says) – if that’s true, for all that matters, that cop was outed
  because of her
  . And then, to crown it all, she votes ABR the next day.
  
  She concludes with a martyr post, and I’ve already expressed my opinion on martyr posts.
  
  
  Verdict:
  for all the inconsistencies on her play, and because of the ABR thing, VOTE: DGB

[undo]

I am disappointed with this case, I thought I had a lot more to put into it. Still, it's difficult to do that when I can't go "I disagree with the way he interacted with player X" because he didn't meaningfully interact with them. Or "I found that vote scummy because..." because he hasn't put down any meaningful votes. Or "His analysis is way off base" because he hasn't made any meaningful analysis.

I’m not going to apologize for my playstyle. If you find me difficult to read, try harder.

[undo]

Also, I'd totally lynch undo. Of course his long-awaited analysis post lands him on the wagon du jour...

lol I could see that cheap argument working for every scenario.

Had I voted inhimshallibe/chamber/CES: "Of course his long-awaited analysis post lands him on someone no-one is voting..."
Had I voted you: "Of course his long-awaited analysis post lands him on one of the easiest suspects..."

You're not going anywhere with that.

[undo]

@Glork:

No, undo. It's the fact that literally the only substantial things you've done all game are:
-Analyze multiple people Day One and wind up voting the most popular (probably town) player/wagon
-Analyze multiple people Day Two and wind up voting the most popular (possibly town) player/wagon

Once is nothing. But your only pattern of behavior is lurking through the thread doing nothing of value, then jumping the biggest, easiest wagon. On BOTH days.

1) You don't know the alignment of Bookitty and DGB (or do you?), so your "probablies" and "possiblies" mean squat.
2) I'm not worried about patterns. I vote for who I think is scum.
3) The value of what I do is subjective.
4) Please tell me exactly when I have lurked. Hint: I never did.

@Bookitty:

Don't worry, I haven't forgotten about you. I put my D1 suspicions on hold because of the huge piece of information that was LML's flip. I needed to dissect the game under that new light before anything else.

Because of this I haven't been paying attention to your (Boo's and mathcam's) most recent posts, but be sure I will look into that soon, and tell you how you are faring in my scum-ranking.

@Porochaz:

I'm sorry to break it to you, but the fact that you don't like my posts doesn't make them all "void of content". Face it: you're bummed because you can't find any concrete, valid reason to attack them. Just rest assured it won't be with gross generalizations you're going to convince anyone.

[undo]

vote: undo

@undo

, I see that you were V/LA for like the five days leading up to deadline, but I still find it surprising that a player as apparently observant as yourself couldn't cobble together an opinion on one of the leading wagons (LML) as it began to rival the Bookitty wagon you supported. You took one weak slap at him June 5th, saying his case on PJ was weak. Can you please explain why you were so hands-off all day regarding LML, particularly considering you found his case on another Bookitty-rivaling wagon weak?

Voting first and asking questions later, eh?

Anyway, to put it simply: Before going on vacation, I was confident in my vote on Bookitty and was expecting to see her lynched. I went on vacation on June 6 and when I checked on the game a couple of days later, I noticed the Bookitty wagon was losing steam to LML's. I didn't have the time to look into LML again (because I was on vacation) and my earlier suspicions on him weren't enough to replace Bookitty in my to-lynch list. So I kept my vote on Bookitty. After my last D1 post, I didn't check on the game until the day was over (I completely missed LML's 'bus' post and all the subsequent discussion and pre-hammer hours -- at that time I was in the West End watching 'the Book of Mormon').

Would you like to see my vacation pictures too?

[undo]

No thanks, sounds like fun though. Would you say it's your playstyle to avoid commenting on the quality of most wagons?

I understand where that question comes from, but I don't deliberately avoid anything. I just tend to be pondered and I normally don't like to post just for the sake of posting. I only comment on a topic when I think I have something valuable to add to the discussion. Perhaps there are many things I choose not to post that you would have found valuable, and there are probably many things I choose to post you don't find valuable, but that's another question.

[undo]

You're just repeating yourself, Glork. Please go back to page 51 and read what I posted there. Here, let me help you:

No, undo. It's the fact that literally the only substantial things you've done all game are:
-Analyze multiple people Day One and wind up voting the most popular (probably town) player/wagon
-Analyze multiple people Day Two and wind up voting the most popular (possibly town) player/wagon

Once is nothing. But your only pattern of behavior is lurking through the thread doing nothing of value, then jumping the biggest, easiest wagon. On BOTH days.

1) You don't know the alignment of Bookitty and DGB (or do you?), so your "probablies" and "possiblies" mean squat.
2) I'm not worried about patterns. I vote for who I think is scum.
3) The value of what I do is subjective.
4) Please tell me exactly when I have lurked. Hint: I never did.

Have you read that? Still unsatisfied? OK, let's see:

You were 6th in MafiaSSK early in Day One.

When I voted MafiaSSK, most people had already lost interest in him (something I still don't understand).

Your largest contribution on Day One led you to the largest wagon and easiest target at the time, Bookie.

I have made an original case on Bookitty and I have clearly expressed my reasons to vote her. Both Bookitty and mathcam were at the top of my scumlist, but we were getting closer to deadline and no-one else seemed interested on mathcam, so I chose the wagon with the most momentum. Cuz, you know, at the end of the day, you have to lynch someone.

You elected to keep your vote on a stagnant (diminishing, even), instead of exploring other options (LML most notably, but KK and PJ each had a few votes too).

Did you even read my last posts? Do I need to show you my pictures for you to understand that I was on vacation and I didn't have time to explore anything whatsoever?

Today, you spent a week putting together analysis and once again it landed you on the largest wagon and the easiest target. I cannot accept that pattern of behavior and coincidence.

Again, I wasn't around to reread the thread during Night 1, so I had to do that analysis during Day 2. And again, I don't really care if it is the largest or easiest wagon, or whatever. I vote who I think is more likely to be scum. Seriously, there's no hidden agenda, you're just wasting your time in trying to find one, believe me.

Eh, that was simple, right?

Now there's a question I have for you.

As you and everyone can see, the argument you presented against me earlier (in post 1272) and the argument you are presenting against me now (post 1308) are exactly the same (well, not exactly, because you dropped the lurking accusation -- and well so, that was pretty ridiculous). So why didn't you vote me then, and why are you voting me now? Now you say you "cannot accept that pattern of behavior and coincidence" but back then you seemed tolerant enough. What changed?

I have a theory, but I won't say anything.

[undo]

This looks like fun! Let’s take a look at this express wagon.

1. MBL

: his post 1297, which led to his vote on me, looks like a legitimate effort at scumhunting (even if its conclusion is wrong). Probably town.

2. Glork

: repeats the case (which I had already responded to) he had made earlier to vote me. Apparently he was reluctant to start the wagon on me, so he jumped on it as soon as MBL gave the lead. May be scum.

3. chamber

: He probably just wants to see my back. Sorry, chamber, I’m going to stick around for a little while longer.

4. CES

: Don’t know.

Voted me because chamber, his inseparable companion, did it?

Yeap, apparently that was it.

5. 6. Yosarian and Porochaz

: They’ve been having bad feelings about me since Day 1 but were unsure about acting upon them. This wagon was an opportunity to scratch an old itch, even though they don’t even know exactly why they suspect me. They’re probably town.

7. Untrod Tripod

: Now this was an opportunistic jump. UT had never expressed any suspicion on me before (if anything, he has defended me twice – once in response to a Porochaz suspicion, and once more recently in response to Glork’s attack of my DGB vote). This 7th vote “just to get the game going” seems an odd one out. Can be scum.

~~~~~

Now for some particular issues raised:

@undo, please explain your "distancing" analysis. Was your intent to find "distancing scum" in the group of people who interacted least with LML? Can you please explain how that kind of distancing (essentially ignoring) is more effective distancing than interacting a lot with LML?

Yes, that was my intent. But hey, you are voting me because you considered I was the one of the players who most ignored LML and the LML wagon Day 1, right? (Your exact words: “undo avoided giving his opinion of LML all day, was not around/willing to hammer”). I take it, then, that you too are trying to find scum among the people who interacted least with LML. Therefore I’m sure you understand my intent perfectly.

your response (saying you don't care about wagons, and that it's subjective) is like the biggest cop out ever.

You think? I reckon it’s a suitable response to your case, which is the most effortless one ever (“Hey look! We’re on Day 2 and he jumped on two big wagons both days”)

You cited your issues with MafiaSSK's opinion on a large wagon versus a spread of votes.

Yet your own voting behaviors fall into the same "scummy" theory that led you to go take a critical eye towards MafiaSSK to begin with.

[…]

The focus of your analysis and behaviors and votes fly in the face of the very theoretical argument that led you to MafiaSSK. You don't want a spread of votes. You don't want parity. You don't want to look elsewhere and discern multiple players' alignments.

^^lol. I see you’re one of that kind who likes to distort the facts into sensationalist formulations.

MafiaSSK voted Tigris because she(?) didn’t jump on your wagon. I repeat: he VOTED someone because that person chose not to hop on the largest wagon at the time (which, on top of all, was RVS). His theory was that large bandwagons are always “guaranteed information”, and those who don’t jump on large bandwagons are likely to hurt town by depriving it of that information (something like this).

What I said was (to paraphrase): “I disagree completely -- MafiaSSK’s theory seems to be against the search for multiple targets. That kind of thinking potentially hurts the town and it surely is counterproductive in such an early stage of the game”.

You’ll noticed I NEVER said I was against bandwagonning back then, and conversely I have NEVER expressed suspicion on someone for not bandwagonning in my most recent posts.

Basically, I didn’t like MafiaSSK defending bandwagons as the only way to gather information as opposed to vote spread. To you that means I’m not morally allowed to bandwagon? Seriously, do you even realize the huge mammoth fallacy in your logic?

or even

revisited mathcam after he replaced MafiaSSK

. You could be delving deeper into my behavioral patterns, given you have expressed "mixed feelings" on me.

I actually did that.

You’re throwing crap at me and you didn’t even read my posts? Also, who said I am not looking into you?

UNVOTE: DGB
VOTE: Glork

Using grossly fallacious, sensationalist arguments against someone to try and make him look bad is something town would never do. Glork is an experienced player and he knows how to use rhetoric in his favor – he just made the mistake of underestimating me. LML did the same thing against PJ Day 1 and I should have been more severe about that back then.

[undo]

Untrod Tripod's vote on undo wasn't town.

Does that mean you are positive I’m town?

Not much. I have a general "I don't have a read on him, so lean scummy" opinion, and haven't mentioned him in my notes much. I haven't done a full ISO to gather opinions, but I feel like I already have sufficient targets today, and if someone wants to sway my vote elsewhere, I'm happy to listen to arguments. I just don't think the argument is there yet.

Hey mathcam. I appreciate you being a pondered and reasonable person about this wagon, but you did FoS me Day 1 (because you felt I had twisted your words, if I am not mistaken). How has that evolved into a no-read?

@undo: do you still believe that Bookitty is scum?

I have skimmed through her Day 2 posts. The roleblocker-crumb justification is valid but it doesn't clear her -- plus she does say she had catch that before entering the game, so she's definitely not a safe townread for that.

And I still don't like her over-emotional, self-deprecating tone ("I was paranoid on the subject "; "I feel really stupid now"; to cite some Day 2 examples). I actually think that tendency is harmful both to town and herself; if she is town, she should really make an effort to cut down on it IMO.

[undo]

MrBuddyLee, is the day over yet? I was going to look into mathcam before you came with your vote on me and started this wagon. That kind of rearranged my priorities, go figure.

Or do you think it's more likely that LML slipped and Glork spotted it and decided, "meh, maybe it's a slip and maybe I was wrong about him?"

Close.

I was thinking more along the lines of "Man, LML messed up, there's no way he can get away with this one. Better vote him already and be done with it".

I do have to LOL at the fact that you fall into your own "prime suspect list" based on your own distancing analysis.

I see you didn't understand my post at all. It was not a prime suspect list, it was a way for me to reduce the scope of analysis to a group where I considered there was a high probability of finding scum.

Also, if Bookitty comes up town, it'd be really hard to make the case that Glork was scum protecting her all day.

It's not impossible, but why are you even bringing this up? What if she comes up scum? And if I get lynched/killed, flipping town, how hard is it going to be for you to save face? How does this kind of speculation help town?

All that being said, a Glork vote is a really ill-considered/scummy vote right now, imo.

I can see how my vote can look like mere OMGUS to you, and I don't deny it may be somewhat biased. But not you nor anyone can seriously say that Glork hasn't made a consciously dishonest case against me. No pro-town player would ever do that. It's reason enough for me to vote him.

Apart from that, I was just ISOing him and I've noticed some interesting stuff. I will put my notes together and post about it tomorrow.

[undo]

4 Good Reasons to Vote Glork

An Anthology of New and Old Arguments*

*meaning that many have already been mentioned earlier

1. He hasn’t made one single case on Day 1

I invite you to ISO him and confirm this by yourself. He has voted six times during Day 1, not counting RVS (37, 171, 428, 603, 807, 830). Not one single vote was backed by a minimally in-depth case and, except for his vote on Yosarian (which only explanation was “Yos's switch from VitR to LML is particularly cringe-worthy and smells like scum trying to ride the tides to an easy lynch”), not one is accompanied by a solid justification. He pushes for PJ’s lynch (posts 603, 605) without ever saying why he suspects him so much. He votes CES because he gets annoyed by him (post 714). His second-to-last vote, on KK (post 807), was simply to put pressure on him. And his vote on LML was because of his “bus post”, even though Glork didn’t believe that was a scumslip (see below).

2. He contradicts himself severely

Glork about “cop-out” replies:

• Post 1029 (in response to PJ, who had asked him why he wasn’t voting VitaminR): “Because I don't feel like voting right now? Here, how about I answer these with one of your own lines from earlier: [quotes PJ] ‘Bluntly, I don't care what you'd like... I will pursue potential scum as I see fit.’ “
  
  Post 1321 (in response to me): “your response (saying you don't care about wagons, and that it's subjective) is like the biggest cop out ever”

Glork about Bookitty:

• Posts 523, 593: “As much as it pains me to say, I'm pretty fine with a Bookitty lynch” ; “I'm like 80% sure that I will be voting to lynch Bookitty or PJ today. I just really can't decide which.”
  
  Post 641: “I've been by and large pretty fine with Bookitty's contributions.”

Glork about LML:

• Post 808 (before LML’s “bus post”; ~19h before deadline): “lynch anyone not named Glork, ABR, Bookitty, DGB, or Porochaz, and possibly LmL”
  
  Post 829 (after LML’s “bus post”; ~8h before deadline): “Better than a Bookitty lynch, except that's going to be a distraction for a while probably.
  I'm not super convinced this will flip scum, unless LmL's slip is actually a scumslip
  ”

He first states he doesn’t want to lynch LML; then, after LML’s “bus post”, he VOTES HIM TO LYNCH, even though he says he’s not convinced he will flip scum (!). If he’s not convinced LML’s “bus post” was a scumslip, WHY THEN did he vote him because of that very same post?

Speaking of which…

3. He defended LML since early on

Glork has generally defended LML throughout the whole game. His first sympathy posts appear page 5, and on page 18 he openly expresses his dislike of LML’s wagon. And – I insist – even after LML’s bus post, and even after voting him to lynch, Glork continued to say he thought he would flip town.

Earlier I thought Glork and LML’s buddying was so obvious they couldn’t be scumpartners (since they are experienced players and all that). But what if that was precisely what they were going for? I realize it’s WIFOM territory, but they surely are proficient enough to try to pull it off.

4. The only case he made the whole game (the one against me) was dishonest and based on fallacious, sensationalist phrasing

No need to repeat myself on this one, my post 1352 makes it pretty clear how Glork dishonestly manipulated facts and used sensationalist formulations to attack me. Accusations of me “lurking through the thread doing nothing of value” come to mind (again, I invite Glork or anyone else to point out when exactly I have lurked).

Even if some may consider he was not that sensationalist (for those I'll leave another Glork quote: "You don't want a spread of votes. You don't want parity. You don't want to look elsewhere and discern multiple players' alignments"), no-one can possibly deny the enormous fallacy he committed in his last attack against me (because logic is not subjective).

[undo]

Nah, I understood your post just fine. And you're avoiding the part where I pointed out that you "reduced the scope of analysis" just enough to leave mathcam out--you had a perfect opportunity to analyze him and you dodged it by drawing an imaginary line at 5 instead of 8. You have to understand how scummy that looks, considering you voted Bookitty day one while making handwavey motions about mathcam being scum:

I made that list to find and analyse NEW suspects. Why would I include mathcam if he was already on my suspect list?

My primary reasons for voting Undo have to do with LML's attack on ABR based on Undo's "legitimate question" and Undo's questioning of ABR about their LML votes. He asks ABR repeatedly why he's voting LML and hunts that line of questioning much longer than I think is reasonable.

Come on, Bookitty, you are better than that.

[undo]

That said, I appreciate that he tried hard. I imagine it's fun going through all that formatting to make a pretty looking post that gets brought into question by a one-liner, an emoticon, and a snarky follow-up post.

Don't worry, I'm fairly used to make pretty looking posts and I like to do it. Also, that post wasn't exactly directed at you, so your reaction shouldn't make much difference. It actually comes as a bonus, because you saying my forth point is an "outright lie" only helps my case.

Well crap.

Undo, if I may ask you one two-part question in complete good faith:

How exactly do you define "making a case" and why is the absence of "cases" an indicator of scumminess?

Making a case: to construct a sound, logically valid argumentation based on a personal intepretation of several verifiable game-facts and events.

As you know, it is difficult for scum to make solid cases based on thorough reads, because they already know the other player's alignments. It's much easier for scum to be around and vote for ad hoc reasons, as you do, since that doesn't involve analysing a person's play as a whole.

So if I don't want to vote Poro, PJ or STD today, and if a bunch of us have this nagging feeling that undo could just as easily be stubborn, dumbass town as stubborn dumbass scum, what's the play?

I know you are disappointed to realise your case against me wasn't as good and accurate as you thought, but resorting to name-calling makes you look sad and desperate.

I made that list to find and analyse NEW suspects. Why would I include mathcam if he was already on my suspect list?

Because if you're town, you're looking to find scum, not a nice group of suspects you can smear?

Once again: I was looking to find scum among that group; I never said all scum was contained in that group, and I never said all my previous suspects were cleared.
Seriously, it's not rocket science. Not that hard to understand.

[undo]

@ undo

Please list all players that have failed to make a case, and tell us how this makes them scummy, or not.

Thanks!

There's a difference between Glork and players like, say, ABR or CES. These play an openly "laid-back" playstyle, consisting mostly of one or two-liner posts and vote fluctuation with few justifications.

Glork, on the other hand, can be fairly wordy with his posts, but never so to justify his votes or to make a sound case against someone (only to defend people, as he said). In other words, his lack of cases is not apparent and not a part of a proper playstyle, but rather latent, at least at first sight.

I had noticed this even before I made my case against Glork (contrarily to what he accuses me of). I took note of it then, but it wouldn't be reason enough for me to vote him if there were no other issues with his play. Coupled with those other points I've expressed, this one gains due relevance.

[undo]

Bah, so much for peaceful nights.

I can confirm PJ's claim. If anyone still has doubts, take the first letter of every prime-numbered post of mine (including the first, because old-school) and you'll find a crumb there.

I

t is such an honor...

A

nd would you like...

M

afiaSSK's wagon is solely based...

@

M

afiaSSK: Nevermind...

A

ddressing what is put...

S

o how's Paris, CES?...

O

h really? Why?

N

o time for a long post...

[undo]

I could see VitR be scum, actually. But he's not our lynch today.

Currently I'm OK with lynching Glork, MBL or mathcam.

[undo]

@Patrick

, is the deadline in 0:50h or in 1:50h?

[undo]

Hey we're alive!

[undo]

PJ, undo, help me, so that I can help my case, and get some scums lynched.

You've got a point.

VOTE: VitR

This day is going to be fun. c:

[undo]

That scumputer thing is too complex for me. Don't you have a user friendly version DGB? Something with a nice GUI where you just click a button and you get a pretty formatted result saying who is scum.

[undo]

VOTE: chamber

[undo]

I'm sheeping PJ.

[undo]

Is KK lurking or what?

I'm not touching STD (a healthy principle, I might add).

Now, the thing with VitR is that he was very active and aggressive during Day 1, attacking LML and all -- straightfowardly calling him scum since page 3 (!), the first player to do so. As Yosarian put it, he was "sticking his neck out too far, too early and based on little".

Then comes Day 2, LML is lynched, and VitaminR is a completely different player -- low-profile, ambiguous, indecisive. The contrast with Day 1 is striking.

And now, on Day 3, he's being more active, but mostly defensive. And as the pressure builds up on him, he reveals some degree of insecurity, resorting to emotional yet cautious replies ("Geez, you guys are nasty. I'm doing my best, is all I can say. This is it." / "Fine, I've earned that. I was wrong, I have to deal with the consequences." / "I think you're being a bit unfair here.").

I mean, if LML had flipped town, I would understand the discretion and the insecurity. But VitaminR was all over LML since the very beginning of this game. He seemed to be sure LML was scum. Wouldn't LML's scum-flip be a boost of confidence for any town player in his place? Instead, VitR just loses his flame from then on, as if he lacked an objective.

VOTE: VitaminR

[undo]

I don't think I'm very good at reading vitamin. I'm perpetually paranoid about him because his scum game is very good.

Lynching him would be a good way to ease your tormented mind.

[undo]

Wow. Hats off to you, OhGodMyLife.

I predict you're going to utter your username several times during the course of your readthrough, though.

[undo]

So have we given up on VitR?

[undo]

What do you think about Yosarian vs. Sotty, undo?

I think they're both town and that we're losing precious time to lynch VitR.

[undo]

Look at all those big wagons where we can eliminate a lot of townies.

Seol/Bookitty (9) --

Sotty7, Shanba,

Cogito Ergo Sum, chamber,

Untrod Tripod,

Save the Dragons,

petroleumjelly,

MafiaSSK/mathcam,

undo

DrippingGoofball (7) --

Untrod Tripod,

OGML/Tigris/Kublai Khan,

Sotty7,

Save the Dragons, Porochaz,

CrashTextDummie,

Albert B. Rampage
MafiaSSK/mathcam (7) --

CrashTextDummie

, Cogito Ergo Sum, Seol/Bookitty,

Untrod Tripod, DrippingGoofball, Sotty7, Glork

MafiaSSK/mathcam (6) -- OGML/Tigris/Kublai Khan,

petroleumjelly

, Seol/Bookitty, Porochaz,

CrashTextDummie, undo

DrippingGoofball

(6) -- Save the Dragons,

petroleumjelly

, mathcam, Porochaz,

Sotty7, CrashTextDummie

Bookittytown: should be totally convinced CESscum.
CEStown: should be totally convinced Bookittyscum.
STDtown: should be voting Porochaz/mathcam/OGML but mostly Porochaz.
Porochaztown: should be voting mathcam/STD/OGML but mostly OGML.
OGMLtown: should be voting STD/Bookitty/Porochaz but mostly Porochaz.
mathcamtown: should be voting STD/CES/Porochaz but mostly STD.

The absence of Yosarian in those wagons is noted.

[undo]

Ugh, didn't see that mason claim coming.

Yeah, you never see them coming.

[undo]

I've already stated why I think VitR is scum -- and why he's the lynch of the day. Go read that post and be persuaded.

[undo]

Hi. Reading the last pages.

[undo]

@STD-voters: LML attempted to start a wagon on STD Day 1 (110), in an attempt to divert attention from himself and MafiaSSK (mathcam).

Do you really think he would to that on a scumpartner?

[undo]

I wasn't expecting such reluctance to follow DGB's lynchplan. Bookitty, what exactly about matcham's recent posting makes you think he is town?

[undo]

I'm here.

And yeah, I'm not feeling scumminess in ABR. But then again, my feelings are seldom accurate.

Is anyone familiar with STD's scummeta? I was going through his ISO and I noticed he liked to attack LML and defend town players. Does he usually choose not to openly defend his scumpartners?

[undo]

I mean, STD strongly buddied VitR a couple of times, what does that say about VitR?

[undo]

A breakdown of VitR's posts since my summarized case against him back in Day 3.

2131 - Defends himself against that case. Not convincing enough in my opinion.
2132 - Agrees. "I basically agree with Yos on StD" (that StD is town)
2136 - Defends himself (against ABR)
2208 - Avoids. "Really busy today"
2251 - Defends himself (against MBL)
2252 -

Willing to lynch Sotty (largest wagon); doesn't explain why

2286 - Defends himself (against Yos)
2287 - Neutral/suspects Sotty (largest wagon)
2300/01 - Questions Sotty
2318 - Defends himself (against Yos)
2319 -

Votes Sotty (6th vote with 9 to lynch). Reason: "I still think her play with regard to LML looked bad and her votes have largely been easy ones". Agrees with matcham against Sotty

2424 - Votes Yosarian
2515 - "Did not see that mason claim coming" (the exact same comment he made after PJ's claim.). Defends himself against Yos.

2525 - Q: "undo, you know things have happened in the game since you posted that case [against me], right?" A: see above

2526 - "OGML looks good"
2632 - Defends himself (against GC)
2633 - Defends himself (against Yos)
2634 - Defends himself (against PJ)
2635 - Defends himself (against MBL)
2648 - Defends himself (against GC)
2650 - Complains about the lack of consensus
2655 - Defends himself (against GC)
2717 - Attacks Yos ("Yos is kinda coming unhinged [...] almost megalomaniacal and totally paranoid"); willing to lynch DGB
2735 - Neutral
2740 -

"I have much less confidence in my ability to read you [DGB]" trying to justify his willingness to vote DGB over CES. Isn't this a bit contradictory?

2744 - Complains about the game not moving forward.
2805 - "DGB looks really town" after all
2829/30 - "Not particularly eager to hammer CES. Hopefully my streak of being totally wrong will continue". Afraid to look scummy? Trying to keep coherence with his past positions?
2849 - Votes Yosarian. Feels the need to point out that he was right about CES.
2885 - Questions MBL's defense of Yos.
2886 - Defends himself (against Yos)
2944 - Defends himself (against Yos)
2947 - Defends StD
2948 - Defends himself (against OGML). "Leans town on DGB".
2953 - Semi-neutral
2994 - Defends StD
2997 - Defends StD
3030 - Comment about PJ replacing out
2088 - Questions Yos
3168 - Agrees with chamber against Yos
3209 -

"Not a fan of GC's willingness to go with two easy wagons (DGB and StD)".

But the day before, VitR had expressed willingness to lynch Sotty and DGB.

3210 - Attacks Yos
3244 - Disagrees with Yos when he says "I think there has to be exactly one scum in the group of (DGB, STD)"
3245 - "I was just noting that you [GC] seem the most content to be on these wagons without doing any digging of your own, just sitting back and letting other people do the hard work." Again, pretty much the same thing VitR was doing.
3296 - Continues to disagree with Yos
3298 - "FYI, I don't think that I ever said that I'll vote StD. I'd rather lynch one of our useless lurker slots than StD."
3299 - Obvious and useless comment about Spyrex's slot.
3498 - (after StD's claim) "I knew DGB was town!"
3499 - "Yos look better"
3507 - Attacks Yos
3555 - Not willing to lynch CDB
3557 - Votes Yos
3570 - Attacks Yos
3659 - Defends CDB
3622 -

Main suspects: Yos and Spyrex. Also suspects GC. Seems like he suspects the people who attack him the most (and whoever occupies the lurkslot)

3661 - "Doesn't care" about ABR's vote.
3662 - More beef with Yos
3665 - Explains why he scumreads Spyrex even though he pushed for StD's lynch
3667 - Defends himself (against ABR)
3669 -

When MBL asks him to compare Spyrex's push on StD with VitR's push on LML, he says "SpyreX's case seemed to have been based on a relatively small part of StD's overall contributions". However, VitR was calling LML outright scum on page 4.

3677 - Points out inconsistency in Yos's reasoning. Fair.
3678 - Case against Yos
3685 - Counterarguments Yos
3688/693/701/726 - Reiterates argument about Spyrex. I don't really understand this part, though: "I'm not sure why SpyreX was so certain about his StD read and that gives me pause"/"I never said that SpyreX is likely scum because of his certainty"
3727 - Attacks Yos


my interpretation: most of VitR's posts since Day 3 have consisted of self-defense and Yos-attacking. Plus there's a fair deal of agreeing and very little original scumhunting, all with generally careful wording. Once again, compare this with his first posts of the game. I still think it doesn't add up.

Obviously this doesn't clear Yos out.

But for now I have no problem in repeating my VOTE: VitR

[undo]

Willing to lynch matcham and Porochaz too. The former because it has always been in my suspect list, the latter because he annoys me (even though he is probably town).

[undo]

OK, maybe I wouldn't vote Porochaz without doing at least a reread on his ISO.

[undo]

I can't really help that I've had to defend myself. Lots of different people have attacked me at different points. There's almost continuously been at least one person strongly pushing for my lynch. And I think it's a little unfair to say I've done little original scumhunting (go compare your scumhunting wrt me with my scumhunting wrt Yos, is it really that different?).

The fact that there's almost always one person pushing for your lynch should mean something -- at the least, it means you look intersubjectively scummy. The same doesn't happen with Yosarian, for example. Also, you have been obsessing with Yosarian since Day 3, and from then on your votes on him are only interrupted by votes on Sotty, a well-established wagon at the time. It doesn't look good.

You know, I actually think you have got less scummy in your most recent posts. But then I just can't forget your behavior during the first days, with that LML-attacking so early in the game and all. It's no use repeating my arguments, but I still think they are very valid.

[undo]

Juls you have yos and mathcam as scum reads but said they are unlikely scum together. What do you think of there little back and forth between 3724 and 3738? My initial reaction was to side with mathcam and I felt more open to lynching yos after reading it. Others seemed to have the opposite reaction. What do you think?

undo, buddy, I think you're tunneling a little on VitR. What's your current read on yos/mathcam?

Still leaning town/scum. But I must admit I'm starting to feel uneasy about Yos.

mathcam is probably the most consensual lynch today anyway. He was first on DGB's lynch list after all.

VOTE: mathcam

Oh and Juls, your contributions are invaluable. Thank you for that.

[undo]

So you subscribe to the theory that Yos and VitR are scum together, MBL? Which one do you think it would be preferrable to lynch first?

[undo]

Well... Gonna trust Juls.

Vote: Yosarian

[undo]

*sigh* why don't I trust my gut more

Dear masons please tell me you were hella active considering that without question one of you was dead.

Sotty and Juls were, and I must apologize them for my low activity. It's been some tough weeks for me lately, but I'm doing the best I can to keep up.

I'll sheep Juls on this.

Unvote, vote Yosarian

This looks really bad in hindsight.

This looks really bad at this moment. I mean, going after ABR now, really?

Oh, and your vote on Yosarian was terrible not because it was a hammer, but because of the unnatural, half-assed justification you felt the need to coat it with.

VOTE: mathcam

[undo]

Bookitty is giving me bad vibes. She's been generally flying under the radar for the last couple of Days, and the few posts she makes look fabricated.

Look at her last few posts, for instance.

"Okay, I just did a quick reread of DGB in ISO. (I did check a few things to see what she was responding to, but I didn't reread the game entire.) She was convinced that mathcam was scum and said he should have been our lynch yesterday."

Everyone knows DGB wanted us to lynch mathcam yesterDay. Did Bookitty do a reread on DGB for this? Why did she point out a single fact everyone was aware of? Why did she feel the need to say she did a reread if she didn't come to any useful conclusion?

Then she asks Porochaz, mathcam, VitR and MBL for reads. When VitR and MBL post but don't reply to her, she says

"I'm not crazy about the way VitaminR and MBL just ignored my question. But I guess that's sort of an answer in itself"

. This looks so much like feigned indignation to me, and at the same time shows how Bookitty

wasn't really interested in getting an answer

. Instead of saying "VitR and MBL, can you answer my question please?", the reaction I would expect from a townie seeking information, she's basically just saying "Your silence is great, because I can use it against you, and I didn't want an answer anyway".

And in her very last post, this is what she has to say:

"My reads haven't really changed much (maybe not at all)."

And then she proceeds to list her townreads, and her townreads only (no trace of scumreads there), which are, surprisingly, ABR, GC and MBL. Not without another unnecessary safety clause:

"These aren't 'OMG these people are town, how can you ever lynch them?' reads, but they're strong enough that I'm not willing to vote them."

[undo]

Unlike most people, I'm not feeling Poro as scum. Although he hasn't been exactly helpful throughout the whole game, his posts look genuine and, at this stage of the game, he is not afraid of appearing inactive/lurking/lazy or being controversial (eg, wanting to vote ABR and expressing it openly).

I'm not sold on CDB, but my current read on that slot is null, so I'll have to do a bit of rereading.

[undo]

So I've done that reread on CDB's slot and much like MBL I can't find an obvious reason to vote him.

I must say KK's play actually looks good in hindsight (went after LML in a decisive moment, questioned people who were defending him, etc). It was probably OGML's exuberance and insistence on lynching DGB that put him on the top of many scumlists.

I also liked CDB's few contributions; and the fact that he apparently started to read the game with 0 information other than the known deaths seems indicative of a town mindset.

Also, after rereading Day 1 and that whole SSK vs Tigris thing, I don't think it's plausible that CDB and mathcam are scum together. And I'd still rather lynch mathcam than CDB.

[undo]

So mathcam, I see you're getting the habit of dropping terrible hammers?

[undo]

Pretty snarky question coming from a guy with your level of contribution this game. Why don't you tell me how productive

your

vote has been recently?

How is my level of contribution an excuse for your antitown behaviour?

[undo]

This massclaim was only useful for scum.

[undo]

Actually, I hope MBL is a VT and the vig bluffed.

[undo]

This massclaim was only useful for scum.

How so? And it's not done yet.

What good is it for town? It's only going to out the last active power role we have for scum to kill him tonight.

[undo]

The scum team is mathcam, VitaminR, and Bookitty.

What's your case on Bookitty?

[undo]

@Undo:

If your one vote could automatically lynch someone, who would it be? Also, did you and Sotty have a chance to discuss last night? Did she have any thoughts about who the remaining scum are?

Unfortunately we didn't discuss much. The only thing Sotty said was that mathcam should be our target today. "Back to back weak hammers", she said -- and I agree.

I know mathcam is arguably the most active player now, but I actually regard his enthusiasm as suspicious lol.

At this point I confess I can't townread anyone anymore.

[undo]

I mean, I didn't really consent to this massclaim.

If I'm the vig, I really don't want to get NKed tonight for claiming, so I should claim vanilla.

If I'm vanilla, I want to get NKed tonight, so I should claim vig.

Boo, Poro, VitR, undo, Spy, do you guys want me to claim? And do you want me to claim truthfully?

It's not easy to answer that question given that we don't know your role. I say you do what you think will be best for town. That said, with that hesitation, it seems less likely that you're a VT.

@Everyone: What are your stances on chamber? Is he solidtown for anyone of you?

[undo]

Do you subscribe to mathcam's arguments against Bookitty, Porochaz? Do you have any other reason to vote her?

Meanwhile, who's actually

against

lynching VitR?

[undo]

We need two of {MBL, chamber, undo} to join us, and barring any major shifts in attitude or compelling new cases, I just don't see any other conclusion to this day.

I can see another conclusion to this day:

The fact that mathcam wagons just seem to dissolve while other wagons (Yos and Glork are two I definitely remember) gain traction and go the distance easily makes me feel even more sure that mathcam is scum.

mathcam voted Bookitty too easily. He's scum with VitaminR and Bookitty will be re-evaluated after they are both lynched.

And I'd lynch you [mathcam] or porochaz over bookitty or vitR, but MBL is where I want my vote.

To be honest, I am willing to join Boo, ABR and chamber here. Guess we just need to translate our intentions into votes.
VOTE: mathcam

[undo]

mathcam has managed to evade his own lynch day after day. I believe we won't have many more chances.

I'm not absolutely positive he's scum, but he has been a close call for too long.

[undo]

Argh, I knew Bookitty was scum. Why do I keep going after the wrong first impressions?
On the other hand, Porochaz tricked me well.

Congratulations, scum! It was a good game everyone, but a very hard one too. It was a real endurance test.

I have to apologise, especially to PJ Sotty and Juls, for my lack of interest in this game after I was outed as a mason. It kind of spoiled the game for me (especially after I put a brutal effort into my breadcrumbs! ).
And it's made me come to terms with the fact that I am clearly not cut out to be a decent mafia player. I reckon I lack the confidence you have to have to express, share, sustain, and compromise your views.

Anyway, thank you all for the agreeable company, and thank you Patrick for modding!