Pick your Poison 3 (Game Over)

[Elmo]

Roleblocker harms us info-wise more than losing one role reveal does.

not sure it does

[Elmo]

Grabbing top of page Votecount

unlucky!

[Elmo]

omgus is fun kids

[Elmo]

vote Ether

[Elmo]

incog is fine by me

[Elmo]

by that I mean his play has seemed fine to me, so no

[Elmo]

this incognito wagon is now officially worse than cancer

[Elmo]

Unvote

:

Ether

;

vote

:

Mellowed Man

- shameless bandwagoning to try and move the game forward in

some

direction. Might vote q21, by the by.

[Elmo]

more mellowed votes plz!

[Elmo]

MORE MELLOWED VOTES

[Elmo]

Ahahahahaha we suck.

qft

Vote

:

scotmany12

[Elmo]

Is there any reason in particular that you're voting for scotmany12?

too... coasty, staying-in-the-background-y, like, want moar out of him

[Elmo]

oh ether, you and your 'actually reading things' shenanigans

[Elmo]

This is a post!

[Elmo]

Ether: I really don't think Incognito's scum. I can see Xtoxm as scum, though, but I really don't think Incog is ignoring Xtoxm in the way you're talking about. I particularly agree with Incog that it's a bad move when we don't know either's alignment.

Incog: Your criteria for Xtoxm-scum seem to revolve around him being noticeably less vocal than Xtoxm-town, is that a fair description of your view in NG 581? Do you feel he has been vocal so far? Do you think his meta still holds true, given that he evidently knows about it at this point? Do you feel others are being premature in their stance towards Xtoxm?

Elvis: Why're you suspicious of Ether?

Unvote

:

Scotmany12

;

vote

:

Xtoxm

! Wagontastic... I'd also be happy to be voting Flameaxe right now (for some reason), but, y'know, momentum. Also, I specifically said in the signup thread that I would be doing relatively little for the purposes of surviving longer. Guess we'll see if my interest level continues to outweigh that. ;o

[Elmo]

I'm still trying to work out if 445 is some kind of self-parody. I guess I'm an optimist.

[Elmo]

HI GORRAD

[Elmo]

This page, Armlx makes the hair on the back of my neck stand on end. Can we wagon him tomorrow? (Today?)

[Elmo]

Armlx needs to die.

Him or Xtoxm should hammer if we're still lynching q21, about whom I remain firmly apathetic. I will laugh uproariously if we manage to lynch the super-saint today after last night.

So Gorrad is confirmed town now?

Sure, floats my boat.

*fans Ether*

[Elmo]

Sarcastro: You need to start commenting on stuff that happened since page 2.

I need to reread sometime... meh.

[Elmo]

INCOG IS TOWN, LET'S TAKE THIS SOMEPLACE USEFUL

[Elmo]

<-- bored with this game, don't wait for me to reread to end the day with xtoxm/armlx death

[Elmo]

discuss

[Elmo]

I'll give it a try

vote incognito

[Elmo]

oops

[Elmo]

Lil' screwing around; mostly just wondering what DGB/perhaps others would do. But no-one cares and DGB won't be posting for ages. Meh.

Unvote

.

I got a laugh out of armlx failed failboating, though, so it's all good.

[Elmo]

Vote

:

DrippingGoofball

FoS

:

Sarcastro

[Elmo]

Town - town argument.

[Elmo]

Unvote

:

DrippingGoofball

,

FoS

:

DrippingGoofball

,

vote

:

Sarcastro

. Easier and decidedly necessary wagon; I have had similar thoughts. Gogo.

[Elmo]

Cause that's what this game needs. MORE WAGONING!

Man, this guy is Sherlock Holmes or something, what with his fantastic deductive reasoning. I'm in awe.

His in-depth analysis here once again amazes

BANDWAGON D4!!!!111

Man, this guy really knows his stuff.

[Elmo]

Gorrad: a) read b) Explain in great detail (in your own words) why Incognito is scum. Come on, I know you're town, don't get myopic on me.

[Elmo]

this incognito wagon is now officially worse than cancer

i'd say worse than cancer mixed with AIDS with a strong dose of Ebola myself

Uh, jdodge was only slightly less vocal than me about how obviously wrong the Incognito wagon was?

Also, why does DGB not have like five bajillion votes on her right now?

[Elmo]

Also: I don't even want a PBPA. Just, like, three sentences on why he's supposed to be scum. I don't want heavy duty analysis, I just want to know which bits you agree with and roughly why. I'm not looking to be convinced, I'm looking to understand your point of view.

[Elmo]

Gorrad: To make a pointless argument, he says that "Xtoxm makes minimal sense as Incog's scumbuddy" in his next post, so even if you're inclined to reason from NKs, that's not correct if the scum did their homework. JDodge appears to be doing his Standard Operating Procedure of not giving his reasoning, anywhere, so I don't follow. *shrug*

armlx: Assume that Incognito is town. Look at the timing of her vote yesterday when the heat is mounting on Xtoxm, a wagon she pointedly ignores. Now look at her vote in 866 today. I don't feel good about that whatever happens, but in combination, she goes on my "would vig" list.

Sarc wagon > DGB wagon because of "If a bandwagon on him

{Xtoxm}

gets going, I'll switch over" when he's known for being wagon-happy and has indeed mysteriously been on a bunch of town wagons.

[Elmo]

I should probably reread.

[Elmo]

Distinction: my problem with Sarc is that a) he has been

avoiding

commenting on anything since page 2 by way of Incognito; b) the aforementioned double-standard towards Xtoxm's wagon. Neither of these are caused by bad play. He is pefectly able and willing to put effort into defending himself with 848 (and answers within a few days of the accusation), but not willing to put effort into finding scum throughout the whole game. I have not the faintest idea who he thinks Xtoxm's buddies are beyond Incognito, and Xtoxm's lynch doesn't seem to have affected his view of the game at all. "Has forgotten his true potential" does not cover it; he's not actually scumhunting.

I don't know what you (Ether) mean with respect to me forgetting my potential. I am honest-to-god not terribly interested in this game right now; I don't see anything wrong with that or how I'm playing. What do you think I should be doing differently?

I am having that sheepish feeling that armlx is town, which is why I wanted to reread. I should probably do that today. I should also probably meta Incognito at this point. Argh.

Flameaxe: When have I ever known you to pass up a chance at killing DGB?

[Elmo]

I have been prodded.

Again.

Fuck.

[Elmo]

[Elmo]

vote coron

Farside. Content. Go.

[Elmo]

Gorrad: 860 does not actually constitute a case. It's essentially
a) You quoting loads of my posts going "worthless" about sixty bajillion times
b) You saying I must be scum because Incognito is scum and I've said he's town
c) I bandwagon a lot
d) I frequently vote without giving a reason
e) I've been uninterested in the game

If you would like to either 1) point out something I've missed or 2) actually provide some variety of reasoning as to why any of a-e make me more likely than average to be scum, that might be a case. Especially when I've said

in the signup thread

that I would probably be abnormally lazy and useless for at least part of this game, and then you assert me being 'useless' is something other than a null tell. Do you think I posted that notice before I had my role PM and then, purely by random chance, acted that way ingame because I was assigned a scum role? Because that seems very backwards to me.

Coron: Yeah, pretty much.

[Elmo]

But you, yes. I'd expect you to chicken out of voting.

Why particularly Coron? How much have you played with him before?

[Elmo]

Hmm, I was supposed to respond to Gorrad before. Please outline how I've taken anything away from the town? If I've taken nothing away from the town, which I would assert, then what I've given must be the same or outweigh that.

a) I thought he was somewhat townish, but he's an experienced player, and I wanted to get another reaction from him to try and gauge him better. I think his reaction is also townish, so that confirms my feeling. There is a semi-breadcrumb of this in my "yeah, pretty much".

Unvote

.
b) To see, perhaps, how other people reacted to that. If he's scum, his scumbuddies might attack me; if he was town, a scumbag might want a counter-wagon to one of the people with votes on them and jump on. I'd strongly imagine that at least one of Sarc and Incog are scum; I believe it's Sarc, predictably, but I think that's true if I'm wrong.

On balance, I tend toward Farside being town (or at least not scumbuddies with Coron) and

vote DrippingGoofball

diescumdie.

[Elmo]

Uh. No. A worthless comment has zero worth. It adds nothing. Also, it takes away nothing. Hurr?

[Elmo]

Gorrad: Comment on mah Sarc case.
Incognito: Reeeead me.

I am feeling stubborn about Incognito. The last time I was stubborn about someone, they were scum (hi Farside). I'm still feeling stubborn. I should (asdfgh) get round to metagaming him. Bah.

[Elmo]

Maybe it's because I'm obviously town.

I admit that I've been largely unproductive, but I don't see why that would produce anything but middling reads.

You're not obviously any alignment, certainly not obviously town. Stop throwing out this kind of rhetoric as replacement for actual reasoning.

I do understand what Incognito means about the double standard. Look at DGB's hop onto Coron, for example. That comes pretty much out of nowhere, and is classic "scum eager for a wagon" behaviour. Compare this to Incognito's "big scummy wagon" as Ether put it near the start of the game for what was at most a fairly minor infraction. You've been admittedly unproductive, and I believe the unfortunate recipient of the solidest case so far, yet basically only me and Incognito seem to be interested. Yet most people are giving you middling reads and some even townish. Doesn't that strike you as odd? That some people are opportunistically looking for any target that will fit that's town, yet the majority of people seem to have had great difficulty getting interested in you?

It sounds a bit like you're just trying to draw support for my lynch by suggesting I'm not just scum but a scum power role, even though there's no actual evidence that this is the case.

This is incorrect because of what he has mentioned; the encryptor is the only scum role of any value left. This merely being incorrect is not what catches my eye. You are flailing for reasons why his attack is scummy rather than addressing the issue. If you were concerned with whether or not his attack was genuine, you would investigate the possibility that there was some reason that he would believe that, and rapidly come up with the right answer. You did not, because you are concerned with accusing him regardless of his alignment as a proxy for defending yourself. That is classical OMGUS, regardless of the fact you've accused him previously. If you were genuinely of the belief he was scum, you would at least be presenting actual reasoned arguments against him. You even ask "Do you think the Encryptor is so valuable that the scum would go out of their way to protect it more than the other two?" when the answer is clearly

yes

to anyone who is genuinely inquisitive about the answer.

If a bandwagon on him

{Xtoxm}

gets going, I'll switch over

when he's known for being wagon-happy and has indeed mysteriously been on a bunch of town wagons.

I don't believe you've 'demolished' this. In fact, I don't believe you've ever responded to me directly during the whole game.

Gorrad: The above seems fairly solid, for one. His accusation that ashmite was Incognito's scumbuddy followed by absolutely no attention towards him, even being reluctant to get on the wagon on his replacement (as above) clearly indicates distancing. If Incognito is town, then there is also the lovely pattern of "try to link this townie to my scumbuddy" so that if the scumbuddy is ever lynched, suspicion falls more on the townie. I have had a feeling that he has been avoiding commenting on anyone but Incognito.. that might be tunnel vision, but it felt deliberate. It is difficult to provide evidence for that beyond the obvious (he hasn't done it) but his rapid and wordy defence of himself seems to indicate that he was certainly paying attention enough that he should have explored more avenues if he was genuinely looking for scum. Particularly, I do not believe he has ever mentioned who Incognito's buddies are supposed to be until recently, where he picked Me and DGB, two relatively easy wagons to push. Certainly even in the exceptional case that he's town and right about Incognito, he's been ignoring three quarters of the scum for almost all of the game thus far.

Do you have any reasoned case on me, Gorrad? I feel that too often, people will say "Alice is scummy" for good reason, but inertia carries on whenever that reason is refuted. I accept your original reasoning, and indeed feel you're pro-town for it, but nonetheless it has (in my opinion) been shown to be incorrect by what I said when signing up. Sarcastro also seems guilty of what you accused me of, and I am curious as to why he (or indeed perhaps Flameaxe) has not caught your tender attentions as of yet.

DGB - Her attacks on Coron are stupid. Maybe scum.

Okay. Apart from me ("Kind of scummy. I forget why"), she's the only one you seem actively suspicious of in 1090. Please pick any of a) remember why you're suspicious of me b) question her about her attacks c) vote DGB d) diediedie. I definitely want either a DGB vote or a lame excuse that will haunt you for the rest of the game out of you.

I have had a sheepish feeling about Incognito recently. I don't agree with any case I can remember on him. I haven't seen him do anything scummy. He had a ridiculously bad wagon on him early on. Yet I do not have any conclusive evidence he is pro-town, and I don't have much of a pro-town read on him on a gut basis. I followed a game where he was pro-town while it was going on, something Vollville, and he seems to be acting differently to there. This is part of the reason I keep saying I want to metagame him, because I don't believe I've read a game where he was scum. I am feeling stubborn, because I'm increasingly aware that I've been operating on the basis that he's town when the margin of error is somewhat small. I

do

believe that, for example, DGB is scum regardless of his alignment.

Part of my reasoning was simple laziness combined with what I said signing up; if I'm wrong, then loudly proclaiming he's town will let me live longer. I was intending to seriously challenge that assumption at some point where I started playing "for real", which happens to be around now.

Incognito: Please provide a game where you were scum for me to read? Length no object.

DGB: Explain why Coron is supposed to be scum post-haste. Your reaction was

precisely

the kind of thing I was looking for with my vote. I cannot think of any even vague reason to positively suspect Coron at this point. You're scum, die plz? DGB

is

scum, nonetheless I would be quite happy lynching Sarc.

[Elmo]

Answer the following: If I specifically say that I will post nothing except "moo" and votes all game when I'm signing up, and then do exactly that, is it a scumtell? Why?

You have not addressed Sarc's interaction with Xtoxm. You have not addressed his distancing with Ashmite. Why have you focussed on the one thing you can find an excuse for not minding, whilst ignoring the two you probably cannot?

[Elmo]

Eh. The above is not intended to imply you're scum. It just seems like you're heavily into confirmation bias.

Assumption (A): Tunnel vision of the specified nature is indicative of scum.
Fact (B): Sarcastro has done this.
Conclusion (C): Sarcastro is scummy.

Assumption (D): Incognito is scummy.
Assumption (E): People wanting to lynch scum are town.
Assumption (F): Sarcastro is wanting to lynch Incognito.
Conclusion (G): Sarcastro is townish.

(B) is a fact. The strength of (C) rests on (A).
Not minding (C) implies it is at least counterbalanced by (G). That is, the strength of (G) is greater than the strength of (C).
The strength of (G) rests on {D,E,F}.

The first conclusion is that excluding other factors (like his interactions with Xtoxm) then if Incognito is town, then Sarc is scummy. Do you agree with that?

(F) is strong. I wouldn't argue with that.
(E) is not always true. There is the possibility of bussing. I would strongly imagine you have not even considered this; I'd be interested to hear how likely you thought it was, and why.
(D) is the main contributor. I have not found any details as to why you believe Incognito is scum. There was something about agreeing with JDodge, but I don't believe you specified what in particular you agreed with.

The second conclusion is that your belief in Sarcastro being pro-town rests mainly on your belief that Incognito is scum, and somewhat on your belief Sarc is not bussing.

I would like you to detail why you believe Incognito is scum. If you agree with Sarc, fine, but state it again, yourself. I don't want quotes or references.

There are three likely possibilities following from the above:
a) Sarc is town and Incognito is scum
b) Sarc is scum and Incognito is town
c) Sarc is scum and Incognito is scum

a) Fine, you're wonderful.
b) You've in pretty bad shape. At the moment, it follows that SarcScum is trying to get IncogTown lynched while being scummy. To do that, he would make an non-factual case on Incognito, and try and get townies to agree with him.
c) You're completely hosed. Your belief that Sarc is town will be massively increased due to Incognito flipping scum. You'll probably be kept alive deliberately to help Sarc in the future.

It is my opinion you are making the common mistake of only preparing for the case where you're right. Most people get it wrong at least some of the time; the thing that worries me is that you've blithely said you agree with Sarcastro without mentioning any details of the case. It is far too early to /agree with something and then let the details drift away over time.

I would point out you were wrong about Armlx and made no attempt to prepare for the possibility you were wrong. I am not saying you should not have voted him; if your belief that he was scum exceeded your 'lynch threshold', then you should have voted for him. There is nothing wrong with being mistaken some proportion of the time. My point is that you would probably be in a better position if you had prepared for the possibility he was town. For example, getting everyone on his wagon to clearly state the reasons they were voting for him would make it much easier to get a read on people there.

The three scum are somewhere in [Incognito, Armlx, DGB, Scotmany]. Just an FYI.

I would be interested in a DGB vote out of you. Who is more likely to be scum out of her and Incognito, and why?

I have gone through a similar process above with respect to Incognito. I am questioning my belief that he is town, which is part of the reason I am asking you these questions in any respect. The next thing I will do after writing this post is go back and look for Sarc's case on him and examine that.

[Elmo]

Sarcastro: You are not obviously town. I did not imply you said that you were obviously town for any particular reason.
You have strawmanned my second point. I have not implied you are scum with everyone, or merely that people not voting you is a scumtell. My argument is that scum love convenient wagons, your would be a convenient wagon, and yet no-one has popped up to push it whilst that has happened to various other townies.

First of all, I bloody well know that the Encryptor is the only scum role of value left.

That was the point of what I said

Why do you think I'm the Encryptor, though? Why not one of the other two scum roles? Do you think the Encryptor is so valuable that the scum would go out of their way to protect it more than the other two?

That does not come across clearly in this quote, no? I mean, it seems reasonable, even obvious, that if the encryptor is more valuable to them than the other two, then they'll be more willing to go out of their way to protect it. The point was that you said "you're just trying to draw support for my lynch by suggesting I'm not just scum but a scum power role, even though there's no actual evidence that this is the case". There is evidence this is the case, in his opinion. You disagree. That is different to saying there is no evidence at all, and he's just saying that to try and get you lynched; that implies he is scum, because he wouldn't genuinely believe what he was saying in that case. You refused to engage with his accusation and show why it was wrong, instead saying that was no evidence and essentially he was making things up.

I never called his attack scummy. I said it looked like he was going out of his way to make up a new reason to lynch me without any actual reasoning or evidence.

Uh. By definition, townies do not "make up" reasons to lynch someone, or wish to lynch someone without actual reasoning or evidence. The only thing separating town and scum is precisely that: the townies genuinely want to lynch town. I don't understand how you can imply he is making up reasons without implying he doesn't genuinely think you're scum. Saying he is "making up reasons" is not merely saying he is wrong, it is saying he is deliberately manufacturing false reasons in order to continue accusing you. Essentially ditto "without any actual reasoning or evidence", which does not admit the possibility he has correct but misleading evidence and is acting in good faith.

And the answer is not "clearly 'yes'" unless you're an idiot.

Why

is it clearly "yes"? Explain it to me. Because as far as I can tell, the Encryptor isn't extraordinarily useful. Perhaps it's just my philosophy of play - as scum, I would never go out of my way to protect a power role, and in general I consider it bad play to do so.

The Encryptor is pretty useful. The ability to deny us the knowledge of a single lynch could be a massive help under the right circumstances. The information from lynching is the only town-directed source of information we have, right? I mean, if we lynch someone looking scummy and we know his alignment for sure, then we can investigate links between him and people he was connected with. If someone scummy is lynched and we don't know their alignment, they might be town or scum, and we don't know whether to follow up people linked with them or not. That's pretty useful; for example, that's why Ether originally said she wasn't touching it. Why would they protect it? Because it's helpful; certainly some people, probably (imo) the majority of people would think it's worth "going out of their way" to protect. Certainly it's worth precisely the information of one lynch to keep alive. It's kind of difficult to reason about without talking specifics, or knowing exactly what "out of their way" is, but certainly I feel most people would avoid putting pressure on the encryptor, certainly to the extent of not starting a wagon on them when there was no suspicion on them. That doesn't seem to be unreasonable to me.

I'd like to point out that saying I have lied, et cetera, implies I am scum, because townies don't lie. No? I don't see how you can accuse someone of lying, misrepresenting, and so on, and then not say they're likely to be scum after that.

Eh. I figure some of my previous attacks are misunderstandings because of Sarc's posting style. I'll clarify some of it later; I'm going to bed now.

For reference, I couldn't remotely care about how you feel about the above posts.

[Elmo]

Muh. I intended to do more than I have. I'm popping in to say this, quickly. I am curious that Farside easily moves from voting me to voting for who I'm voting. More elaboration on both votes, please.

Sarcastro: Anyone caught lying should be lynched post-haste. Specifically, Merriam-Webster: lie, verb, "to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive". Not a flippant comment or a provocative vote, a bald-faced lie. So, uh, if you're right, point it out to a majority of the town and get me lynched already. Everyone: I strongly encourage lynching liars! Lynch lynch lynch!

n.b. My opinion on Sarc is in flux. I should (damnit this sounds familiar) probably reread.

[Elmo]

Uh. I didn't?

I haven't voted for Incognito in a month and a half? Did I miss something?

[Elmo]

Farside: You've quoted it. I didn't think Coron was scum; I don't. I thought that a scum might want to start a wagon on him, so I threw a first vote out to see if anyone would jump on it. DGB did, and I thought her reasons for doing so were scummy, so I immediately moved it to her. I think she's scum.

DGB: I detailed that in 1124. (This is typical, people complain about me not posting, then they either don't read or don't remember what I post!) Approximately, I've been operating on the basis that he's town when (I now realise) I don't really have solid reasons for doing so. When I debate with myself about his alignment, one side always ends up saying "I know there's no actual evidence, and I know my gut doesn't actually say he's town, but nonetheless he's toooooowwn damn you" which is, historically, a bad sign.

DGB: Explain why Coron is supposed to be scum post-haste.

This.

DGB - Her attacks on Coron are stupid. Maybe scum.

Please pick any of a) remember why you're suspicious of me b) question her about her attacks c) vote DGB d) diediedie.

Also, while I remember, this.

[Elmo]

I didn't pretend he was scum. I voted for him, to get a reaction, and wondering if anyone would jump on. Indeed, when he asked if I voted him for defending someone who was town, I replied that was essentially what I was doing. I don't believe I've ever said he was likely to be scum. The whole point was that a bandwagon on him would be "un-natural", inthat I don't believe anyone had vocally accused him at that point (if I remember correctly), so a vote on him would essentially come out of nowhere.

I believe it's very common to vote someone without a reason to provoke a reaction. Ironically, I believe Coron himself said recently that he does that (I could have misremembered, here). It's certainly not philosophically very far from the random voting stage.

I don't see why it's WIFOM. I have had this feeling once, where I defended Farside in S&S2, where she was scum. That's probably my biggest mistake to date (granted, part of it was based on buying into her distancing with her buddy Setael, who I was wailing on at the time, but whatever). So, no, when I'm reminded of a similar situation that turned out badly, I think it's perfectly reasonable that I should recheck my thinking for any holes.

[Elmo]

That's not pretending that you think he's scum?

No.

I believe that I did. Didn't I?

No.

Not to lynch? But to provoke a reaction? Mmm, yeah, I suppose.

Yes.

I cannot help but notice you have not answered my question.

[Elmo]

Typically, have lost interest again.

Probably not doing anything until DGB dies. Pretty sure Sarc's response didn't engage with what I actually said. Don't really care at this point.

[Elmo]

cuz a) DGB obvscum b) it's Sarc c) lacking interest in mafia again

[Elmo]

Gorrad: One of the big leaders like Incog / Sarc as opposed to DGB who has twice as many votes?

Explain?

[Elmo]

Flameaxe is being less useful than usual.. I think that's not indicative of his alignment. I could be wrong. I don't have any strong feelings about lynching him. DGB today, I figure. I must admit, I do not know why he suddenly crops up right now when he's been the same for the whole game. That seems odd to me. Sarc.. why now?

I have this irritating feeling that Incog is scum and Sarc is town. I also have that paranoid feeling that Gorrad has been pressing for an Incog lynch because he feels it'll lead directly to my mislynch, because of how I acted towards him earlier. Mh, emphasis on paranoid. I

really

want him to elaborate on precisely why he thinks Incognito is scum, because I don't remember any actual reasoning. On reflection, my reason for thinking he was town is not valid.. I don't like the way this feels regardless of Incog's alignment.

I am annoyed that Incog is now really really scum. I have no idea why. I am annoyed I have no idea why. Nonetheless: Incog, did you answer Ether's query? Inthat, I remember you mentioning your meta on Xtoxm-scum, but you didn't seem to get into him very much at all.

Gorrad: Why do those two having been at each other's throats mean we should lynch one of them as opposed to DGB? What is your stance on DGB?

Mod

: Please prod everyone who hasn't posted in a while? Thanks.

Someone

be around to hammer DGB now or near deadline.

[Elmo]

Interested in anything from Flameaxe or Sarc.

BBM, be useful now plz.

[Elmo]

For the record: I don't have a problem with it, but personally, I never have and probably never will place any weight in that kind of voting analysis. I feel it gives a far too incomplete picture of what happened.

[Elmo]

Looking at who voted for who is great. It just takes a lot more than inspecting a single end-of-day vote count to do correctly, in my opinion.

Coron keeps being right. That's a neat trick.

[Elmo]

Coron, Gorrad: Why'm I scum?

Farside: Skimming, I don't believe there's a double standard there. I posted something specifically in the signup thread, other people haven't. Situations aren't identical. *shrug* I will read in more detail later. =]

[Elmo]

Oh. Sorta simulpost. Okay.

Coron: If it isn't obvious, I've basically tried to be much less pro-town than usual this game. That's deliberate; previously, I've been nightkilled very quickly, so I simply wanted to live longer. I said this when signing up. So, yeah, in addition to losing interest in mafia quite a bit, that's why. Too many boring games

I also remember you asking about Flameaxe. I don't know.. I think any read I'd have on him would be very speculative, due to the fact he's done so little. I can't think of any reason I'd want to lynch him off the top of my head; my stance on him earlier was to get him out of the way, if I remember correctly. I think he's slightly townish, but he is a lot more useless than usual, and I don't like that. I think I'd prefer to lynch someone else today, but I don't feel strongly about it yet.

I'd be surprised if anyone had a reasonable belief I was scum at this point. (shrug)

[Elmo]

As I've said before, you had a lot of quotes, most of all followed by "worthless". The implied reasoning is "Elmo hasn't contributed much so far, therefore Elmo is scum". This has been refuted, has it not?

[Elmo]

Addendum: I believe I've asked you to clarify the reasoning there several times, and you've always shied away from doing so, as far as I can remember. Every time, it seems to provoke a response of either not answering the question, or something along the lines of "I already answered that". Why is that?

Your PBPA was made on Friday, June 13th. So, yes or no, please: you have not changed your position on me in the last two months.
Y/N: There has been no new information that might help you decide whether I am likely to be scum in the last two months.

[Elmo]

Hm, if you follow: as of a short while ago, I felt it was likely that exactly one of Sarc and Incog was scum. So.. "one of them" is my #1, if that makes sense. Oddly, I've swung about as to who was more likely to be scum.. recently, I've leaned towards Incog being scum. His play is just entirely unlike what I saw when following Vollville. I don't think he's dropped any scumtells per se, but the meta feels quite different. That's why I thought his wagon was bad: he was being voted for something I felt was unlikely to particularly indicate he was scum. I'd like Sarc to post more, though - I don't believe I've heard much on recent events, although I may be wrong there.

I am currently trying to understand where Gorrad is coming from. His previous position matches a fairly nasty pattern I've seen before: "let's lynch my scumbuddy, then that person who I'm going to try and link to him!" regardless of the fact that the interactions we have is

hugely

less likely to come from a scumbag who knew he would flip scum than a genuinely uninformed townie. I don't believe there's much WIFOM involved there. I previously thought he was townish, but later realised that towntell was probably wrong. I'm currently struggling to see how he can still genuinely hold the position he does.

Currently, I'd prefer to lynch Incognito.. if not him, then.. Gorrad? With the proviso that I might change my mind on him if he can satisfy me. Actually, by process of elimination, Flameaxe is not a bad lynch as I thought.

In all honesty, I should probably reread. (That sounds familiar. )

[Elmo]

So, yes or no, please: you have not changed your position on me in the last two months.
Y/N: There has been no new information that might help you decide whether I am likely to be scum in the last two months.

ANSWER MY QUESTIONS.

[Elmo]

They are two fairly simple yes or no questions, are they not? I am going to assume you've answered yes/yes, because that's the best I can make out.

Okay. Why did you think I was scum before? What's this "previous scuminess"? And don't just duck the question by saying "read my PBPA" or similar; your PBPA has a bunch of quotes and

no reasoning

to the extent it doesn't even seem like analysis to me.

Seriously, why is it so difficult for you to lay out why you think I'm scum?

[Elmo]

Okay. Point by point. Point #1: I didn't contribute. Why does that make me likely to be scum, in light of what I posted signing up?

[Elmo]

Perhaps that's an answer to some question somewhere, but not actually the one I asked.

[Elmo]

Seriously, why is this difficult?

Why does not contributing make me likely to be scum? It's a fairly simple question.

[Elmo]

Is using the letter "e" a scumtell?
Why?

[Elmo]

Um.

How can using the letter e possibly be a scumtell? One with a 0% effectiveness, or what?
What do you mean by "an equal scumtell for everyone"?

I mean, at the moment, you seem to have a fundamentally different definition of what a scumtell is and how to approach mafia generally. So, yes, we need to go back to mafia 101 if we're going to effectively communicate, as far as I can see.

I mean, what does "scumtell" even mean to you?

[Elmo]

Farside: I have always given reasons why I believed someone was scum. I have always answered why I voted who I did when asked to. The fact I have voted for people without giving a reason is different; if someone had asked, I'd probably have answered. I don't believe there's a double standard there.

Gorrad: As far as I'm concerned, you could just as well be joking about everything since "Elmo's scum". It all looks ridiculous to me. I think I've figured it out. It's.. just horribly broken. Okay. Supposing I was town, what would I have done differently? If nothing, then how can it possibly be a scumtell if I would have done the same thing if I were town? I don't think I'm going to change your mind, but I have some sense of morbid curiosity about this.

Hm, I think I've lost interest again. Oops.

[Elmo]

Flameaxe may or may not be scum.
Incognito

is

scum.
Decisions, decisions!

Vote

:

Incognito

. C'moooon Sarc/Gorrad, where did the IncogHate go?

Farside: I believe I missed that. I stated why I thought Sarc was scum iiin 981, which was admittedly a while ago. There were a few extra bits in 1124, too. I don't recall you asking me why I voted Coron; I replied to him with a literally true answer. It obviously wouldn't work very well if I said "yes, I'm voting you merely to see who jumps on"; if that's the case with anything Gorrad said, he's welcome to say that, and if it made sense, I'd accept it. I asked him the same question several times, and each time he answered it in a way I felt was not giving a straight (or sometimes even apparently coherent) answer.

Gorrad is not answering me. I give up. It's no skin off my nose; no-one's listening, for good reason. (shrug)

Gorrad: Why do you think Incognito's scummy?
Coron: Do you suspect Gorrad? I might comment on that bit about Incognito later.

I think Flameaxe should agree that either he posts content in a week, or asks for replacement, or gets lynched.

[Elmo]

Mulling over Sarc. I am amused that we seem to have exchanged opinions on Incog over the course of the game. Sarc, how good's Ether's read on you?

Gorrad: Why do you think Incognito's scummy?

*waves*

Mod

: At what point will someone be replaced? The situation with Flameaxe is now kind of ridiculous.

[Elmo]

Wait, you want to kill Incog now? Weren't you defending him before? Or am I confused?

Yup. Yup. Nope. Also, sorry if I pissed you off, for whatever reason.

Gorrad is in the middle. I just don't see anything that I would call scum hunting.

Yup. Doubly so, given he considers non-contribution a scumtell, amirite?

I don't care for Incognito's interpurtation of what DGB meant with the Flameaxe harmless comment.

Yup.

I got the impression he was impatient, but I don't know why.

Lynching people is fun!

Vote: Incognito

. Let's not let this one slip through our fingers. Incog today, Elmo tomorrow.

Fancy pants is correct.

Vote: Incog

. I await his thrilling response even though I know what it's going to consist of.

Why is Incog still alive?

Curious about these. I have a bad feeling about his wagon, although his play sucks, yeah.

Flameaxe.

GET REPLACED

.

Fun exercise for

everyone

: Go pick any random Incognito post from Vollville. Pick any random post from here. Compare the two. Is it not kind of obvious?

Mod

: Please forcibly replace Flameaxe? What is the precise definition of 'inactive' in the first post? (If that's a no, I'll settle for a prod.)

[Elmo]

but really, the sheer amount of lurking and worthless posts is astounding. It borders on Flameaxe-level.

Hey, maybe there might be some underlying reason for that not related to my alignment! Especially since I don't do that as scum!

I've played with Flameaxe enough to never expect anything from him. For you, I know better.

How do you know better, exactly?

Gorrad

: Why are you nigh-certain that Farside and Coron are town? How can you possibly be that certain at this point? Why do you say "the events of today have flipped previous accusations on their head" - what's changed today for you? Why do you believe "just lynching someone" will help the town's chances? How can you state that without a vote on anyone, and worse,

no idea who you want to lynch

?

Also, you haven't put any pressure on me. You've made an argument, which I've refuted, and now no-one's listening; I could happily go back to lurking if I was inclined to, and probably live a fair while. The only reason I actually went through it so thoroughly was because your abuse of logic irritates the shit out of me, and it would be nice if you'd pull your finger out if you're town; I'm posting now because it would be nice to lynch scum again, after my glorious triumph yesterday.

---

Sarcastro

: Gorrad's 860 is given by:

{words}

Followed by either "Worthless!" or "Bandwagoning!"

for each post I had made up until that point.

I have asked him like a billion times to clarify his reasoning. He hasn't. The only reasoning I can extract is:
a) Elmo's posts have been worthless, therefore he is scum.
b) Elmo's been bandwagoning a lot, therefore he is scum.

I have refuted both of these. I have pointed out that I specifically said I would play lazily when signing up for this game, and that both of those are caused by laziness, which obviously cannot be related to my alignment. He has not directly responded to that. I believe he has deliberately avoided the question several times. If he

is

town, it's a terrible, terrible case, about which he apparently declines to engage with anyone. In addition, he has given

no

reasoning towards anyone else that I can find over the entire game, and any questions I ask have basically been ignored. The closest I've come is his 1329, which is still entirely "you bandwagoned so you're scum!!" without any explanation of how my bandwagoning is scummy.

So if you can get any kind of actual response from him, I'll probably have to nominate you for a scummy or something. Good luck, though.

---

I don't like the Flameaxe wagon. No-one's got any particularly good reason to believe he's scum, or indeed virtually any read on him. I believe Incognito to be scum, with one other scumbag; even with town reads added in, that's got to be like 4/5 or 5/6 odds to lynch Flameaxe-town from your points of view. I don't see why "oh, he's probably town, but he annoys me" is supposed to be an acceptable reason to lynch someone at one away from LyLo. If you think he's probably scum (or even somewhat more likely than random to be scum), I'd like to hear reasoning why. Because I will absolutely hold you accountable if he flips town.

I'll have a go at my own Incognito exercise in the next post.

Flameaxe

: Why aren't you asking for replacement?

[Elmo]

...

Fuck this, I'm going back to lurking.

[Elmo]

I posted that across the board. You know that.

Yeah, that wasn't really directed at you. I acknowledge that you're almost certainly telling the truth about activity in 1398.

I'm more irritated that I can't really bring myself to disagree with Sarc's position, and we have probable townies voting for statistically-likely-townie, and there's (again) nothing I can do about it. If he's scum, I'll jump for joy; but meh.

[Elmo]

Mod

:

Please?

Don't make me use the puppy dog eyes.

I might well actually do stuff, now.

[Elmo]

Hmm. I'm having a good day so far. *plays music*. Let's play mafia; threadbomb time.

After O/D'ing on my reading of Elmo, I think he might be town here too.

Have another look at your role PM. Yup, I'm town.

Yes, there's a very good chance that he's town, but if as town he's still not even willing to

try

to contribute even when threatened with death if he doesn't, well, there's something goddamn wrong with him, and he shouldn't be playing mafia.

Mmm. The problem I have is that I'm not sure it's a question of

willing

or

able

. I've played with him when he's been town, and when he's been scum; his playstyle involves not posting content, reasonless votes, and so on, but he was always inclined to actually show up and do stuff, either alignment. That's why I've been pressing him to ask for replacement instead of posting content. I'm going to reread those old games, and try and see what his activity is like site-wide.

I figure, either it's deliberate or he's not able to post regularly. Therefore, either:
1) He's town, and not trying.
2) He's town, and constrained.
3) He's scum, and not trying.
4) He's scum, and constrained.

1) Is quite unlikely, I find, based on previous experience. He hasn't necessarily

contributed

much in other games in terms of making large posts of analysis (and I suspect he has disdain for such), but he had the same goal as us, and certainly voted and pressed people in line with his suspicions.
2) Is possible. I believe I've seen him lurk as town and not get replaced, even when he clearly should have.
3) Possible - as long as he believes we won't actually lynch him. I'll detail this path below.
4) Quite possible. I haven't seen anything in line with his town play all game, because he hasn't done much. He definitely has gone without posting when scum due to real-life constraints before, and resumed posting when those let up.

I believe Sarc's view coincides with the following; this puts us in something like a Prisoner's Dilemma.
If we opt to let him live when he's idle, then he's inclined to do it all the time.
If we opt to lynch him when he's idle, then he's possibly less likely to do it, but we'll be lynching a townie most of the time.
I think Sarc's view is that we should lynch him, in order to account for the possibility that he's gambling we won't lynch him. I also think there's a fair amount of genuine annoyance with his play. In my experience, people tend to have an odd kind of risk-averseness to being deceived; no-one wants to run the risk of feeling like they'd have the wool pulled over their eyes, so they over-account towards options that eliminate that possibility, even when it's suboptimal play.

That, amongst other things, is decent evidence that Sarc's town. In particular, Gorrad's "I just want to lynch someone, anyone" is

much

more what I'd expect scum to do in this situation. I actually think that it would be fairly easy for scum to push this wagon, but they're not inclined to; certainly Incognito seems to be steering clear of it.

So one important question is whether or not he believes we're likely to go through with lynching him. If we can answer "yes", we can conclude that his inactivity is due to constraints and not deliberate. That would simplify matters quite a bit; in particular, if he believes we would lynch him, it's optimal play to ask for replacement, regardless of his alignment. I believe that he takes this threat (per se) seriously, and that's why I've pressed him to ask for replacement; he

should

be doing it regardless of his alignment.

But I've committed to voting Flameaxe until he shows at least some willingness to contribute, and I don't think I'm going to be changing my mind anytime soon.

(shrug) If you're doing it because you made a commitment and don't want to go back on it, I can respect that. But that doesn't mean it's the right play.

These are verbatim, publicly available quotes in an ongoing game.

I'm here, still need to read/catch up. Summer assignments + film projects (which was mentioned in GD a while back, if you're wondering) = not a lot of internet time.

Pwnz has officially jumped on my scumdar. Also, hello. Long time no see. School started, early workload > me. I'll have much more access/time to read starting next week. This is just a "commenting on current shit while I finish the other stuff (rereads)" post.

Meta seem to indicate that Flameaxe is more active in other games, though. I don't like that. The problem I'm left with is that it seems clear that there's some reason for his lack of activity site-wide, but that doesn't mean

all

of his lurkiness is down to it. Personally, I would rule out the idea that all of his lurking is just him being lazyscum; there's definitely some kind of real-life situation whereby he can't post as much. I get the feeling that this game is relatively low priority; it's harder to discern whether that's because he's scum and doesn't need to do anything or whether there's some legitimate pro-town reason to be less interested in this particular game.

---

I'm just confused about Elmo's about turn face for Incognito.

Okay. Let's go back to the beginning.
Sarcastro started Incognito's wagon on page 1, pretty much. The basis for this was in post 69, which is:
* Incognito stated that it doesn't matter what powers the scum have; this is scummy for unstated (?) reasons.
* Moreso, that seems like a lame justification for not giving reasons for how he voted.
* He voted for the rolecop.
* He's OMGUSsing; as a cover, his second post claims that he's more likely to be targeted by scum, and there's no reason to believe that.

I didn't really like this much at the time. I agreed with the sentiment of Incognito's statement, inthat (in my opinion) people have a tendency to rely far too much on power roles as opposed to 'normal' scumhunting. There's a subtle disconnect between what he actually said ("If people post and do a good job scum-hunting, then it shouldn't matter what power roles the scum have") and what Sarc interpreted him as saying ("it doesn't matter what powers the scum have"). The emphasis is fundamentally different. The town actually has quite a horrible record in plain vanilla games, but I'm nonetheless of the opinion that they're perfectly winnable. (I signed up specifically for a vanilla game to see what it was like.) On that basis, the only purpose of the scum roles apart from the vig is to disrupt the town power roles; if they do it totally, then we've got a vanilla game. If you take the view that vanilla games are perfectly winnable with good enough play from the town, then his comment makes perfect sense. Ether apparently agrees with this in 101. I didn't (and don't) see his remark as particularly scummy.

I didn't follow the role-picking at the start too closely at the time. I do remember (and read) that people had differing opinions; I don't really see an underlying reason why Incognito's vote for the rolecop was significantly better or worse than anyone else's. For example, q21, BabyGirl, and Ether voted for the rolecop. Scotmany was undecided betwwen the rolecop and RB. As we now know, all town. So, unless there's something I've missed, I've be fairly sure that this point's not a tell. It might be revealing to go back and look at who voted what, now we know what role we were assigned. I'm not really inclined to at the moment, though; it seems like it depends too much on people's opinions on balance to be that helpful.

Not giving reasons why you voted? Everyone did that apart from a few people, far as I can see. If he didn't want to give reasons, he'd just.. not give reasons.

The last point is one that I thought might hold some kind of merit. I've said before that OMGUS is a relatively difficult tell to read correctly; people do it for a variety of different reasons, and there's a perfectly logical basis for why a townie would do it. What he specifically said was that "the people who accuse me of being scum are often scum themselves". That seems odd, to me, inthat it's a specific meta claim; scum are generally loathe to tie themselves down to anything that can be actually checked out. The additional problem is that it doesn't even have to be true, particularly; if he has a decent basis for

feeling

that it's true, then it seems reasonable, even if it's factually incorrect. I do think it's significant that he shifts the burden of proof onto Sarc, though; there's no way Sarc can disprove it without trawling through most/all of Incog's completed games. In that respect, it definitely seems out-of-place, although more odd than definitely scummy.

So, I didn't like the starting reasons. Then we've got babygirl's vote because "incog seems like he's trying too hard to defend himself with defenses that aren't really that good of defenses". Mellowed Man with a reasonless vote. Dave with a reasonless vote. mr. incrediball uses OMGUS as a reason to vote without any analysis. ashmite QFTs Dave and hops on. Ether unvotes, saying "my inner stubborn says he's being bussed, but the speed and composition of this wagon does creep me out." Everyone unvotes, Sarc tries to get them back on. Foom, wagon over. Sarc says
"FoS: Everyone using this as a lame excuse to unvote Incognito", which I hafta QFT in retrospect.. this looks like a classic case of a scumbag gets run up, his buddies get overeager with the bussing, then someone says "wow, this wagon is scummy", mostly because it is, then everyone unvotes. I think I've even had that happen to me twice, and I've seen it more. If Incognito's scum, Sarc is

definitely

pro-town, here. Ether says "His wagon was opportunistic to a scary degree; it creeped me out long before I actually unvoted. [...] This means that Incognito has a big scummy wagon that probably does not share his alignment. So he's town." Right. So I'm thinking roughly the same, at this point. I think everything points to Sarc hitting the right target, and the mafia bussing, but Sarc's original case not being strong enough to sustain the nastiness of the wagon forming.

Okay. So, what's changed? Well, one thing is simply the passage of time. I thought his play near the start of the game was odd, slightly out-of-character relative to what I saw in Volleville, but nothing that mightn't be caused by being put off by a sudden wagon on him. His play over the course of the game, however, is totally out of whack relative to the games of his I've seen. Also, a game I was with him in just ended where I was scum, and got to see his pro-town play up close. Again, nothing like this game.

---

Let's have a look back in retrospect, eh?

Elmo, why is incog's behaviour "fine by you"?

Hey, look. A scumbag

doesn't

hop on the wagon, but doesn't defend him, instead trying to get

me

to implicitly defend him. The post is a bundle of fun; it directly implies there is something wrong with my finding Incog's behaviour fine, but Marmalade makes no attempt to accuse Incog, or even put any pressure in his direction. In fact, "fine by me" just means I haven't seen anything wrong with it; he's basically saying, hey, why haven't you seen anything wrong with this? It seems kinda straightforward that Incognito's likely to be his buddy.

What we need is some A game scumhunting and we should be fine.

Don't think it's coincidental that ashmite echos Incognito's thoughts, here.

My apologies, I read through the thread, and definitely found Incognito suspicious. Take post 72 for example, I totally disagree with his claim that it doesnt matter what power roles the scum get. Not caring as to the power roles of scum, suggests he has no care for the town, thus making me think he is scum. My votes stands.

Really, really weak vote. Basically parroting Sarcastro here; pretty much looking for a reason to vote Incognito. ashmite later QFTs this post and uses it as a reaosn to vote for Incognito! Since the mafia can daytalk, they'd be coordinating the bussing; it makes sense to split up, two on and one arguing strenuously against it in case it doesn't result in a lynch.

Major pro-town points to Marmalade for Post 113 in which he votes for and FoS's two of the people who failed to explain their Incog-wagon votes.

Hey, look, how about that. Of course, there's no

reason

to give someone major pro-town points for that; they might easily be buddying up to you. This is something I've seen scum do with their buddies a lot, when they're trying to maintain the position that they're pro-town; if a buddy defends them in this kinda situation, they tend to agree and call them pro-town. I can't think of a good example offhand, though.

Incognito also does something classically scummy in post 151; he rails at ashmite for a paragraph, even using the

italics

to describe how wrong and scummy what he's doing is, gets a crappy response, and... leaves it there. Never follows it up. He does, however, continue his attack on Coron. Why? Because he wants to merely give the appearance of fighting back at ashmite, but knows Coron will actually carry on the conversation properly, so to speak.

Interestingly, BabyGirl puts a vote on Incognito for a somewhat crappy reason, and Flameaxe pops up to vote her, after Coron puts one on. I get decent vibes from the vote, though, her reason is pretty poor. Mellowed is scummy; a bunch of people follow me onto that wagon. It grows ridiculously fast, aaaand Dave places the hammer, saying "the incognito lynch is never going to happen", though apparently not reading the vote count. Huh.

Day two. Elvis correctly observes that "Dave posted 5 times total so far, voted incognito with no explanation and then just reguritated other people's reason's when questioned." starkmoon votes Dave! I am interested that Sarc sees Dave's action as a newbie scumtell. I get a slight vibe in that direction, rereading. Elvis and Ether's comments on being bussing seem incomplete; they don't allow for the possibility that someone would be bussed, but still be pissed about it regardless of the fact they could daytalk with the person doing it. I would probably be epicly pissed. Dave's reasoning for FoSsing Elvis in 278 is

terrible

. Being terrible at mafia's hardly a scumtell, but it's very significant when you consider Sarc's comment about Dave possibly being newbie scum, right? He's certainly newbish enough to pull that. Marmalade defends Dave, going so far as to FoS q21 for suggesting he be lynched! Interestingly, there are a lot of votes going on Dave at this point, from JDodge, Ether, etc. Oh, wow. Right on time. Incognito pops up to vote Flameaxe and says "Would any of the non-voters care to join me on a mid day 2 lurker wagon?" Jdodge says he's sure Flameaxe is town. Incognito backs off and suddenly decides "Dave needs to die". That's a pretty big tell; lurker wagons are usually an avenue of last resort, right? Why would you want to drive a wagon on a lurker, then (with no change in the game) say someone else pretty much needs to die? Armlx pops up to say Flameaxe is obv town this game. I have no idea why he said this offhand, but it really worries me right now, since Armlx is pretty good, and JDodge agrees, and Jdodge knows Flameaxe probably better than anyone. Xtoxm adds a vote to the growing Flameaxe wagon! I'd be near certain this is scum trying to fuel a counter-wagon to Dave's. His reason is truly terrible, "he's doing nothing". I'd be staggering if Flameaxe was his buddy. Dave makes some comment about self-hammering, saying "that way it wouldn't risk any other town players" which seems amazingly daft, like either he's hinting at being a super-saint or is just clueless; he says he's a townie in the same post. Dave self-votes.. this looks like trying to copy Incognito, and get out of being lynched that way.

Hi, Ether. She's pretty much totally right, far as I can see, and I feel like kicking myself for not getting it sooner. For no stated reason, Incognito's read of Xtoxm is "badly in flux". Incog has plenty of experience with Xtoxm-scum before; he's pretty obvious here, there's never really any doubt as to his alignment with the knowledge of the meta shown later. "Since he's entered the game, he has been commenting on game-related stuff even if his contribution has been short and sweet." in post 371 is outright evasive; he's avoiding commenting except when pretty much forced to, and it's mostly been oneliners; he hasn't been remotely involved in the game. That's pretty much exactly the scum-meta mentioned in the newbie game. Ether's 110% right here, you can basically go back, read all her posts, and QFT it, so I'll leave this alone now.

Xtoxm is scum.

Incognito is scum.

This is not a drill.

It's a combination of your FAILURE TO DO ANYTHING EVER and the fact that Incogscum, who should certainly know all about the differences between your scum/town play, tolerates this and tries to avoid you.

I feel he's been more vocal here than I would expect him to be as scum. In Mini 539, I also felt like he may have been actively lurking since he seemed to just be answering questions posed to other players but he turned out to be town there also.

Xtoxm's play? VOCAL? Read his posts. Nononono. Ding ding ding, we have a winner. You know what pisses me off most in mafia? When I'm dead right, I say stuff, then get killed off because I know what's going on, and no-one bothers to reread what I said. So, when someone smart dies, now I always reread who they were suspicious of, and why. And she's right.

Incognito uses Dave's self-vote as the sole reason not to support his lynch in 386. That's pretty transparent, in context. DGB votes for Dave, saying "I'd like to test Sarcastro's scumdar", which is interesting. Her vote is classic scum-town, in that she avoids giving any of her own reasoning (not like it wouldn't be evident, but hey).. I think it's very possible that DGB's distancing, here. She moves her vote off Dave and onto q21 a few posts later. DGB OBV COACHES XTOMX. HOW DID ANYONE MISS THIS. Incognito votes Coron in 498, despite (I think?) agreeing he was likely to be town earlier. Remember this attack is carried on from early day 1, right, as opposed to ashmite? Yeah. I'd be really surprised if Coron and Incognito were scum together.

A load more stuff happens, none of it that relevent. Armlx and Coron's interchange makes me giggle. Can see why I thought Sarc's reluctant vote for Xtoxm was scummy; in retrospect, it's because he's a lil' reluctant to move away from Incognito rather than to move to Xtoxm. This feels like a much more natural interpretation. Farside votes xtoxm in 697! I missed that. That makes me feel a bit better about her. Incognito easily slipping into agreeing with the majority that she feels "really scummy", as well as Coron, makes me feel even better about both of them. Gorrad real-posts for the first time in 724. "Incog and Coron are fairly obvious scumbuddies", hey, look, let's link my buddy in danger to someone pro-town, that's original! BIG scumtell here. "Xtoxm, it should be pointed out, is lurking a lot more than is typical of him. He's usually posting all the time." YES, CORRECT. THEREFORE? "Not sure if this is a scumtell, but it's different from the townplay I usually see from him." NO, NO, NO! YOU'VE HAD LIKE THREE PEOPLE POINT OUT HIS SCUM META, WTF? Way to be amazingly wishy-washy about soon-to-die scum. Flameaxe's lack of Xtoxm vote in 751 is odd, but it doesn't feel

that

bad. DGB's vote for Incognito in 777 is unusual. Definitely avoiding Xtoxm's wagon, I feel that she's more than capable of reading that Incog's wagon here won't pick up. Noteably, the lynch goes through, and then the next day, she votes Coron,

avoiding

Incog when he already has two or three votes from Sarc/Ether.

Day 3. Gorrad comes along. Stunningly obviously trying to link me and Incog. Scotmany prods him for an actual case, which he abjectly fails to provide. Farside makes a good point against me (I haven't mentioned my signup post at this point) based on what I feel is likely to be a genuine read. And

here's

an interesting point - remember DGB avoided Incog? Now she jumps onto him, and Gorrad pops up later to say I should be hammering. Gorrad fails to answer me about why I'm supposed to be scum. Note that Gorrad has basically done nothing at this point, to the point of blowing off any actual analysis in 873, but is

very

confidant that Incog's scum, and that I'm scum, and indeed

that we should be lynched in that order

. Jeep's Finding Mafia tells (origin of "jeeptell") states that "Mafia generally have more information than other players, so whoever picks up on tells/hints easiest is more likely to be mafia (+10%)." I think that's a pretty great example, in context. He has basically no solid reasoning for his conclusions on either of us (and has manifestly failed to provide any since then when questioned), yet he's

very

sure of himself at the time. "Yes, they're all scummy, but Incognito's the one that's surefire." in 897. Big, big tell. DGB chimes in right after, agreeing that Incognito should be lynched in 905. Incognito avoid commenting on DGB in 910, saying he's "not sure what to make" of her. Coron and DGB's interactions here are somewhat in Coron's favour. Farside votes DGB in 932! Even more townish. Her reason for the vote feels good. My post 981 is semi-right.. he's been doing the two things I describe, but I understand his attitude, now. He's convinced himself that Incog's correct, and the case is strong enough to get him lynched. I would guess that he's been accurate, actually, which is pretty good play; but I think he believes the case is much stronger to other people than it is. It's a trap I've occasionally fallen into in the past, as town - something's eminently obvious to me, so I just say it and assume it's obvious to anyone else. Actually, I have exactly the same attitude; will you please hurry up and lynch the scum, etc.

Gorrad's 996 is outright weird. He says the three scum are in a four-person group that doesn't include me, when he was apparently so sure beforehand. Scummeh. Pretty certain Incognito is scum in 1028, again. He's now trying to link him to armlx! This is hilarious. That's like three different people through the game. Then he hammers Armlx, saying "Tomorrow we can get to Incog".

Day five. Gorrad immediately votes Incognito, saying "Incog today, Elmo tomorrow". Can I haz obvious? Flameaxe follows him onto Incognito! Yes! DGB presses Coron a little, ignores various others. Jumps on behind me, gets caught, hee. Farside follows me onto DGB in a townish manner. Yay. Flameaxe wants to kill Incognito, cool. GORRAD POPS UP, AGAIN, IN 1228 TO SAY "We need to lynch one of the big leaders, such as Incog or Sarc, and see which is right and which is scum. At the moment, I seriously doubt both of them are town.". OBV OBV OBV. Perhaps it's coincidence that Incognito and Gorrad put the last two votes on DGB, heh. Certainly there's remarkably little interaction between them.

Day six.
Gorrad is absolutely faking being convinced by farside's analysis. Just please, the strength of his opinions he's expressed previously being changed by a couple of posted vote counts? No, just no. Coron correctly takes issue with this. Incognito still likes Gorrad as town in 1286, for shitty reasons! Yay! Farside does a shitload of townish analysis. Gorrad's stunningly wishy-washy about Flameaxe again in 1309. Let's angle for a mislynch, yay! Gorrad successfully irritates the shit out of me (what's new?).

Okay. I know what's going on. Everything makes sense.

---

A Smaller Summary

Flameaxe has some actual real-life thing happening. I don't think he's lurking purely because he thinks he can get away with it, but if he's scum, he might be lurking more than he would as town. I don't have a problem with Sarc's position, but still think he should be replaced instead of lynched.
Addendum, after reread: Various things over the course of the game make me feel that Flameaxe is pro-town. We should definitely be lynching someone else today. Specifically, confirmed town JDodge says he's town. Known scum freely voted for him.
Sarc's almost certainly town. I think his perception of things is that his cases were stonger than they were, and people were just not self-confidant enough to follow through with lynching, and there's some truth to that - but he's definitely town.
Coron's probably town on a number of levels, specifically DGB voting him, his town read on me (I think), and just general good gut vibes (c.f. Scotmany's gut). He's harder to read due to playstyle, but um, yeah.
Farside's just townish on general gut/meta. This is less solid that the others, I'll probably read over some games tomorrow. Addendum: There are a lot of points in her favour over the course of the game, actually. I'd be pretty happy saying she's town at this point.
Incognito's early day 1 wagon was bad and wrong. Smart pro-town people agree with me on this. Nonetheless, right for the wrong reasons; he remains scum. In particular, Ether was dead right about him and Xtxom. Also, I have ze meta on him, and I've now shown things specific to this game that make him a great lynch. Ether's case alone should have killed him days ago.
Gorrad's the leftover. He replaced Dave, who was very newbscum, refused to answer questions, and makes perfect sense as a scumbuddy for Incognito. There's always the possibility of confirmation bias, but the two of them fit quite nicely for me. Go look.

Actually, what was going on just about crystallised when I was thinking it over in bed last night, but that reread's really solidified my reads. I'd be all the money in my wallet that Incognito's scum, and I'd give really generous odds that Gorrad's his buddy.

---

Flameaxe

: Your next post should contain an Incognito vote, plz, if only for self-preservation.

Sarcastro's recent posts with respect to Gorrad are absolutely right. Gorrad needs to get in here and explain himself. Or die rapidly, preferably. Why am I never a dayvig? I wanted to be a dayvig. Why do I have to jump through all these hoops to kill people?

Hey, I wonder if we can figure out who Mr. I hid with now.
I want Incognito to explicitly spell out what is happening in post 314.
I want Incognito to explain why he didn't use the Dave wagon in his analysis of wagoning.

There, I've Done Stuff. It'd be nice if people'd try and match that level of effort, although perhaps not necessarily the length It's late, and I've written it somewhat haphazardly, but you should be able to see roughly what I mean. If there's something missing, I apologise. I'll do the metagaming with Incognito if people want, but I feel actually the issues in this specific game are more convincing at the moment. Damn, rereading is so helpful. Right, I'm off to bed.

Mod

: Please prod Gorrad. Tee yee.

[Elmo]

(and in fact would discourage anyone from hammering Flameaxe yet)

Pretty sure Gorrad's just hastily laid down the hammer to shut me up; there are about a million things wrong with his post. Flameaxe, vanilla townie, was lynched day six; a purely numerical loss to the town, but still pro-town.

It's Gorrad and Incognito. All you have to do is read back through the game, and look for the tells. I would bet everything in Incog being scum, in particular.

You two had better nightkill me tonight, or I will fucking destroy the pair of you tomorrow. (And none of that "oh, it's WIFOM" crap when I die, please.)

[Elmo]

Okay, that was predictable. I didn't say it out loud on the off-chance the mafia didn't think of it. Depending on Flameaxe's alignment, we're now in LyLo. I'm pretty sure he was town.

Possibilities:
a) Flameaxe was scum. We lynch a townie today. We see tomorrow, and know he was scum because we didn't lose.
b) Flameaxe was scum. We lynch a scumbag today; there will be no tomorrow, because we won (2+1+1).
c) Flameaxe was town. We lynch a scumbag today; we go into tomorrow knowing Flameaxe was town, because we would have won if he was scum (2+1+1).
d) Flameaxe was town. We lynch a townie today, and we lose.

In particular, normal LyLo rules apply: a single vote from a townie on a townie will lose the game.

What I'm pretty sure is happening is:
* Flameaxe was town.
* We are in LyLo today.
* We will lynch scum today (or tomorrow is irrelevant).
* Therefore, tomorrow, we will know Flameaxe was town; i.e., that we were in LyLo today.

So I'm going to abuse that a bit.

The Play is:
* I vote Incognito.
* We wait; everyone checks in. If Incognito is town and Flameaxe was town, scum quickhammer, co-ordinated via daytalking, and we lose.
* Everyone checks in. No hammer. We then know that, if Flameaxe was town, at least one of {Elmo, Incognito} is scum.

No-one else votes

.
* Ditto with Gorrad.

Then it is either:
a) Flameaxe was scum.
b) Elmo is town and the scum are {Incognito, Gorrad}.
c) Elmo is scum.

Then we lynch Incognito-scum today. Tomorrow, we'll know that Flameaxe was town (eliminates possibility c). That

clears

whoever is still alive and didn't hammer today, and turns it into me-vs-Gorrad. The scum

cannot

nightkill me, because then I would be confirmed town, and therefore Gorrad would be confirmed scum.

Am I still looking so pro-town to you, Gorrad? Perhaps you were thinking you were screwed yesterday. No, kiddo, I'll show you what screwed looks like.

Phase one starts now.

Vote

:

Incognito

. Game on.

[Elmo]

Xtoxm.
Why Gorrad is town.

I am not remotely interested in SarcScum, no.

[Elmo]

Nope.

Typey typey.

[Elmo]

Funny, that.

I still think Elmo is town, I still think farside22 is town, and I still think Gorrad is town.
[...]
Basically, if Flameaxe was scum, I have no problem being lynched today [..] I think Sarcastro is scum so on the condition that you lynch him tomorrow, I've got no problem with my lynch today. If Flameaxe was town however, then that changes things obviously.

I'm not gonna waste my time typing shit while I stand the chance of getting quick-hammered in the meantime.

So, like, Flameaxe was scum, Sarc is scum, right? So who's going to quickhammer you? It's almost like you know there's still two scum alive, ey?

We could play a game of chess or something while we waited, if you like.

[Elmo]

This one. Yeah.

Okay. Vote's not moving. I will grovel if I'm wrong.

[Elmo]

Am I the only one who doesn't get why Flameaxe's allignment wasn't shown? I don't see a role that does that.

* Players often ask about something they caused. When players ask "what's up with XXX" it means they probably did it.

Heyup, jeeptell.

Also, in your now infamous 860:

Roleblocker harms us info-wise more than losing one role reveal does.

not sure it does

It does.

Taking that stance

requires

you to understand that we can lose a role reveal. You've obviously understood it there (when it's convenient to argue with me, of course), so, uh, you're lying? Are you claiming amnesia or something retarded?

Gorrad, now would be an awesome time to answer my questions, and y'know, engage with me. Even a little. What do

you

think of Sarcastro? Why didn't you wait to see if Flameaxe would be replaced? Why did you hammer Flameaxe when I'd just posted a post that you really liked

saying he was pro-town

? Why is your being "convinced" by vote analysis so obvious contrived? Why have you basically put your fingers in your ears and hummed as loudly as possible whenever I've asked you a question about something relevant this whole game?

---

Sarc's attitude towards Farside reads okay to me. I do think she's town, but that's based on things that wouldn't necessarily appear the same way to Sarc; gut, a bit of meta, and some of her interactions with who I think is scum, off the top of my head. I felt the timing and placement of some of her votes were unlikely to come from scum, and actually I feel she's been quite a bit more involved than Gorrad has when she's been posting. But yeah, I probably wouldn't be happy basing my Incognito vote just on both Farside+Sarc being town, although obviously that factors into it.

Incognito: I perhaps should have been more specific. I'm not requesting that you make a case on Sarc, because I don't believe that he is, and I doubt it'd change my mind on you, but obviously I will read it if you make one.

Lynching Gorrad today is, in principle, okay with me at the present time, although I want to do more analysis first. Waiting for Farside to /check in.

[Elmo]

Oh, I forgot that Farside's away until tomorrow. Okay.

Small addendum: Sarc, I think you might do well to revisit why you thought I was scummy before. I remember you posted essentially "Elmo's kinda scummy, but I forget why." There are these sort of vague, murmuring feelings that go round unscrutinised sometimes, yeah? I wouldn't remotely mind if you went and looked for any evidence in favour of me being scum. In fact, I'd rather like it (although I'm not specifically requesting) if you'd do that for Farside. If you'd rather spend your game-time elsewhere, that's fine with me too.

[Elmo]

Hm.

You like M.U.L.E.? I've never played it, but I think I liked the sound of it.

[Elmo]

Clicked your GTKAS out of interest when reading some finished games. You have good taste (+1 Curse of Monkey Island).

Also,

Well, there we go. You now have so much bad-argument experience, it's time for you to level up! You can continue gaining levels in 'idiot arguer' or go on to some presitge classes- Moronic Voter seems good, or Terrible Townie, or, my favorite, 'Labradoodle'. Again, congratulations. You really deserve this.

AHAHAHA. Awesome.

I'm just kind of spinning my wheels for a little while, really.

[Elmo]

What is your meta on Flameaxe? What makes him townier than DGB or Sarcastro?

I'd rather not go into specifics ATM, but I'm pretty sure he's town in this game (

specific tell

).

Reread turned this up; Emphasis added. I happen to have been in a game as scum with Flameaxe that JDodge was in, whereby he said this:

...this is when looking at past behaviours comes in handy as in most cases people will tend towards at least one thing as scum.

I know one very reliable tell for Flameaxe-town that I have not seen committed yet, and no I will not tell you what it is

. However, with no concrete scumtell, I cannot - and will not - commit to his wagon as I feel it is based solely on his own playstyle.

Here, he said:

Damnit, that

didn't

need to be said aloud, and Flameaxe isn't town for that reason. I'm not telling you why he's town.

I don't think he ever revealed what his reason was. I would surmise that, counterintuitively, Flameaxe dropped a towntell here. (I may have a decent idea what it is, but it's too speculative to really get into... and JDodge would poke me in the eye if I was right and spilled the beans. ) So yeah, for me, that adds even more weight to the Flameaxe-town supposition.

Only two pairings that mean Farside hammers for the scumwin are {Farside, Gorrad} and {Farside, Sarcastro}, I think. I've spent a while looking through the game for any indication of the former, and I keep bumping up against stuff which would make basically no sense. The latter would require me being wrong about basically everything.

So. Vote stays. Farside should turn up soon.

FARSIDE, HI!

DON'T VOTE FOR ANYONE

, JUST SAY HI OR SOMETHING. HI?

[Elmo]

Yup. I worked this out yesterday.

I've made what I consider a strong case that Flameaxe was town, so the following assumes that.
My vote for Incog means that Farside - Gorrad, Farside - Sarcastro, and Gorrad - Sarcastro would have hammered by now. (1)
Incog's vote for Sarc mean that Elmo - Farside, Elmo - Gorrad and Farside - Gorrad would have (probably) hammered by now. (2)

Therefore:

Global View

a)

Elmo - Farside

(2)
b)

Elmo - Gorrad

(2)
c) Elmo - Incognito
d) Elmo - Sarcastro
e)

Farside - Gorrad

(1+2)
f) Farside - Incognito
g)

Farside - Sarcastro

(1)
h) Gorrad - Incognito
i)

Gorrad - Sarcastro

(1)
j) Incognito - Sarcastro

Specifically:

My point of view

f) Farside - Incognito
h) Gorrad - Incognito
j) Incognito - Sarcastro
Incognito is confirmed scum.

Sarc's point of view

c) Elmo - Incognito
f) Farside - Incognito
h) Gorrad - Incognito
Incognito is confirmed scum.

Farside's point of view

c) Elmo - Incognito
d) Elmo - Sarcastro
h) Gorrad - Incognito
j) Incognito - Sarcastro
If Elmo is town, Incognito is scum.
If Sarcastro is town, Incognito is scum.
If Elmo is town and Sarc is town, the scum are {Gorrad, Incognito}.

Global View

The only way Farside can be scum is with Incognito.
The only way Gorrad can be scum is with Incognito.

So you're correct. But it gets better. If we lynch Gorrad-scum today, Incognito's confirmed scum to everyone, since he's the only person Gorrad can still be scum with. And that's game. ^_^

It can possibly be pushed further, actually. But I need to go do something now. I'll try and be back later.

[Elmo]

Wow. gg

Grovelling begins now, hah.

[Elmo]

Wow, first time that's happened. I really can't see it going any other way in retrospect.. hum. I am not deeply surprised that Gorrad was a mislynch if one was going to happen, moreso about Incog. Again, grovelling. Dunno, perhaps I was biased because you were looked so obviously town to me in Satin Doll. (IIRC, I have said

exactly

the same thing as scum somewhere before, so forgive me for discounting the mini/large thing.)

My initial thoughts are that Sarc basically slid through the entire game. I suppose that's what I was worried about before, but I figured Ether was saying that was normal for him, so there's not a great deal to be done about it. Umm. Farside played good, that I can remember. I'll be interested to reread this. I suppose that's another black mark for that particular kind of inference, heh.

What is fairly odd is that the more I analysed this, the worse my reads seemed to get. I'm not quite sure what that means yet.

Also, yeah, talk about the worst possible day/night 1 ever. Why would you not claim as a hider? Oh well.

[Elmo]

Oh, yes, this may not be obvious: I acted like that simply because I found some kind of motivation, mostly by accident, and was pretty sure it wouldn't last forever. Even yesterday and tonight, I found myself struggling to stay interested; this was my last game before I take an indefinite break from mafia. Honestly, I didn't hate this game, probably mostly because I lurked when I got bored, but I'm not sure if this kind of absolute apathy is worse or better. Anyhow, I gave it a shot. gg

[Elmo]

Hey, Gorrad, for a counterpoint to that, read the tail end of Big Love. That's basically a perfect example of how that kind of analysis can backfire. I'm serious when I say relying solely on that kind of analysis leaves you very open to non-clueless scum. For example, Farside22 is voting for scum in every votecount posted apart from day 2. A vote is not the same as a vote! If scum read the mood properly, they can vote for their buddies all the time in the knowledge that they probably won't be lynched. This results in stuff like Alice voting for Bob all through the game, saying Bob needs to die, and Bob not actually dying until like LyLo - 2. Then everyone is like, wow, she's been after him all game! She must be town!

There's also the fact that some scum will simply be hyper-conservative with respect to bussing and their voting patterns will look pro-town; possibly moreso than if they were actually town, because they can place themselves perfectly on each scum lynch. You might want to look at the recent Satin Doll Showdown for an example of that.

---

I would like to emphasise that my play in this game (with respect to the signup thread thing) was sort of a proof by contradiction; I will sometimes try things I believe will not work, simply to verify that they actually don't. I think that I executed it fairly well (in particular everyone agreed I was pro-town at pretty much exactly when I wanted them to, and ignored me before that), but it was simply flawed from the start; certainly I've learnt quite a lot from how it affected the game flow. In particular, what happens relatively early has a *much* greater effect on the lategame than I thought, at least when people read back. I think I was right in that it didn't work, but totally wrong as to why.

---

Second of all, I have been poking at lurkers this game. There's actually quite a few of them, and it's fucking impossible for me to poke at all of them at the same time. Can we run down the list? DGB, Gorrad, Sarcastro, Xtoxm (if you'd like to include him), farside22, Coron, Flameaxe, Elmo... I mean seriously.

I am curious that all the scum lurked. I'm not sure how much that contributed; Farside and Sarc played pretty well, from what I can see, but I have to wonder how well lynch all lurkers would have worked here. Let's remove JDodge and Flameaxe (for whom lurking is quite clearly a null tell), Coron (who either wasn't lurking or for whom it's a null tell, depending on your definitions) and me for whom I'm (in my view) largely excused by my sign-up thread post; that leaves (in order of lurkiness) DGB, Gorrad, Sarcastro, Xtoxm (if you'd like to include him), farside22. That's a town win with onl one mislynch.

Interestingly, armlx's reads seemed a lot different from the majority view, but (iirc) if you combine them both, I think the scum are in there. Perhaps that's a statement of the obvious, but I can't help feeling there's a general principle nibbling at me somehow.

BM: I just thought Sarcastro sucked as scum. "Metagame Sarcastro" was on my todo list, but virtually nothing on that got done this game. (shrug)

Also, wow, armlx and Coron's exchange starting around 581 is probably the best thing ever.

[Elmo]

While I see your point, I think you might be massaging the results a little. If lurking can be considered a null tell for JDodge, Flameaxe and Coron, it could probably be considered a null tell for me to some degree, too (and maybe some of the other scum, I don't know their metas well enough).

Yeah, I was thinking something like that in bed after I wrote it. Coron wasn't lurking by my definition (and I don't take issue with his playstyle, actually, I know where he's coming from), and JDodge and Flameaxe do it

consistently

in every game; that that respect it's different from people who are sometimes lurky but vary by game. I'm not sure to what extent yours was site-wide and to what extent it was game-specific, but I'm pretty sure that site-wide lurking tends to manifest itself much moreso in games where people are scum. So I'm half-and-half about it on you. I'd think it was out of character for DGB and Xtoxm, though, and I believe I remember Farside saying some of the lurking was deliberate. It definitely seems at least an odd coincidence to me; If I continue with mafia, I'm definitely going to be harder on people I feel are lurking from now on. A lot of this comes from having been textbook lazyscum in another game, as well.

My opinion of Sarc being bad scum was just one of those vague, hazy things that I never actually put any faith in; I certainly wouldn't take it as a serious evaluation of his play before now. Let me try and pin it down... aaaah, I see now. I was in Short & Sweet 2 late last year, and read the original game, where Sarc was scum. He was under serious heat and his replacement lynched day 1, which I remembered correctly, but it was his

replacement

, not him, came up with (in my opinion) a stunningly bad fake claim. I didn't remember much about his play; skimming it quickly, I think it was less than stellar but not really bad. And it was two years ago, I'd hope he's improved since then . So that's where that came from.

I've been completely neglecting all of my games, and I've (probably temporarily) lost interest in playing mafia, so I've asked to be replaced.

What up, losing interest buddy! How did that work out, anyway?

In my opinion, there are things about your playstyle that hurt you when you're town, but I don't know if my opinion on that would be welcome; it's probably better done by PM, if you're interested. I haven't read any games where you were town in much depth. (I replaced you in Big Love, but you had like 3 posts there iirc.)

q21

: No pro-town player 'deserves' to be lynched unless they're lying or something. I fucked up with Incognito. Everyone on your wagon fucked up. It happens, but it needs to be acknowledged. I didn't think your wagon was very good; possibly you could have defended yourself better, or looked more pro-town, but ultimately people voted for someone who was pro-town, which is a mistake. If you want, PM me and I'll look over it more closely.

With what I wrote in the sign-up thread in mind, I'd be curious if people had any suggestions for me, but I can't really see a lot to be said; by the time I started playing, it was worse-than-vanilla. It's difficult to know for sure, but I don't think anything I did reduced my chances of winning. "Get better reads"? (shrug)