I seem to have fallen into the habit of giving John a review of the episode and the preview, but not about anything important at all.

Here's what I've learnt as a result of this week:

• They liked the muttonchops *a lot*
• there's a long version of the butt-slide across the car, and an animated GIF might be in the offing

My vote on the second is pretty damned clear.

And, hey! Another think coming! Just saying!

And they did quell my "can't con an honest man" issues. It wasn't used as a moral high ground, or a crutch, or an obstacle. Or even, really, a shared viewpoint. I really liked what they were doing there, in fact. Usually they just magically know the weakness. It's interesting when the person they need to influence isn't the bad person, and doesn't have the obvious places to get traction.

And, hey! Another think coming! Just saying!

I noticed that!

And they did quell my "can't con an honest man" issues. It wasn't used as a moral high ground, or a crutch, or an obstacle. Or even, really, a shared viewpoint. I really liked what they were doing there, in fact. Usually they just magically know the weakness. It's interesting when the person they need to influence isn't the bad person, and doesn't have the obvious places to get traction.

I liked that, too.

So it works because it is not "you can't cheat an honest man" but "you have to work harder to cheat an honest man"?

For me, I think the issue was mainly that they weren't actually trying to cheat him. They were trying to get him to do something they wanted him to do, and they had to work out how to lead his way.

When people say "that wasn't a con, then" if I suggest something that works against honest people, I roll my eyes, but I think this really really wasn't a con.

I mean, they were pretty much working the con in convince more than the con in confidence. And Nate mostly redirected Eliot, which is what John did to me when I initially mentioned it.

(I got into this argument elsewhere, and the person defending it said that cons hinge on expectation of profit without sufficient investment, and I asked--what about fake charities? It took three go rounds for him to say a) that's a con and b) fine, then. I did also try and get him to call Kevin Bacon dishonest for investing with Madoff, but it's amazing how people can ignore enumerated lists when they have a point to make.)

I'm wondering what Nate's deal is. I think that he has a terminal illness (like say, the one that his kid died from), and he's grooming Eliot to take over as mastermind.

Breaking Bad--this GIF will represent Awkward! to me for some time hence: [link]

I'm wondering what Nate's deal is. I think that he has a terminal illness (like say, the one that his kid died from), and he's grooming Eliot to take over as mastermind.

I also feel that he's preparing the crew for him to leave. I hope he isn't dying! Good grief, no.

Okay, for the first time, Peter from Warehouse 13 made me laugh. "That's right, girlfriend, I am the sassy best friend!" Usually, he annoys the crap out of me.

this GIF will represent Awkward! to me for some time hence

Good one. That was epic awkward.

And they did quell my "can't con an honest man" issues. It wasn't used as a moral high ground, or a crutch, or an obstacle. Or even, really, a shared viewpoint. I really liked what they were doing there, in fact. Usually they just magically know the weakness. It's interesting when the person they need to influence isn't the bad person, and doesn't have the obvious places to get traction.

Also, it was pretty much only Elliot expressing the view, and he's not coming from the con background. And it was kinda disproved to him.

I did find his slideways look at Nate at the end a bit ominous. I couldn't tell if it was worry, or something else (and I really hope they don't go THERE).