# Colorless Mafia **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 2, 2009, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729 "2009-12-02T18:21:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/261 "2009-12-07T21:58:05Z")
Scratch that, **amrussel** isn’t a newbie, but I have no idea if he’s ever been scum. ---
**Author:** ![peekercpa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8baadc/32.png) [@peekercpa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/peekercpa)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/262 "2009-12-07T22:01:40Z")
> [@special\_ed](#): > > and there goes my ability to read my own game from work… my bad, sorry. the other day i asked peekkid#4 if she wanted some pancakes. she repoked afffimatively and then added she wanted some “FUCKING” bacon. i would like to say that i responded reasonably. of course, what i said was: cook it your fucking self, then. we went and got tacos. ---
**Author:** ![DiggitCamara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@DiggitCamara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DiggitCamara)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/263 "2009-12-07T22:24:42Z")
> [@special\_ed](#): > > and there goes my ability to read my own game from work… On that note, I wonder how one does recognize when **peeker** is scum. He always posts kinda the same, random notes, aggressively going after any and everyone else… Are there examples of games during which he was scum? I only remember one game during which he (as everyone else) believed himself to be the SK. And, as far as I recall he behaved in that game just the same ol’ way. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/264 "2009-12-07T22:25:52Z")
> [@DiggitCamara](#): > > On that note, I wonder how one does recognize when **peeker** is scum. He always posts kinda the same, random notes, aggressively going after any and everyone else… Are there examples of games during which he was scum? > > I only remember one game during which he (as everyone else) believed himself to be the SK. And, as far as I recall he behaved in that game just the same ol’ way. He apparently got caught in the current game on [idlemafia.com](http://idlemafia.com) - I didn’t read through to get the blow-by-blow there; there might have been an investigator. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/265 "2009-12-07T22:26:51Z")
> [@Rin\_Twisted](#): > > A vote, and then an unvote, all before the player in question even gets a chance to react and respond? Seriously, what was the point? I thought I had seen something, but it was actually nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/266 "2009-12-07T22:31:42Z")
**peeker** , you said something (feeding baby so can’t go back to search) about how you’d lynch the hell out of the first person who brought up the whole Miller thing. So why are you not voting for **Freudian** right now? ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/267 "2009-12-07T22:50:05Z")
Wow, I leave you guys alone for five/six hours… It’s been a bit of a rollercoaster catching up the past couple of pages. It’s getting late here so I’ll cover the salient points in what is hopefully a concise yet informative fashion: 1. **Tom Scud** and \*\*Zeriel \*\*are on my wavelength re. the interpretation of “should”. 2. Secret messages? Any post that discusses what scum might do, or not do in a given situation is open to the interpretation that it’s scum covertly talking to scum, and I realised that when I made my post. That said, I’m not sure what the exact message is I’m meant to be trying to convey. Here’s the suspect quote: > [@me](#): > > If we get to the point where the best strategy for scum is to sacrifice one of their 3 remaining players, I’ll be perfectly happy. More to the point, as I have no ability to enforce this policy on the town, I’m not too worried that I’m painting us into any kind of corner. I really don’t see what the secret message could be there other than. “It would be bad for scum to lose their roleblocker,” which is true but not something that so desperately needs to be spelt out on Day One that it would be worth breaking cover to say. Especially if, as suggested, scum won’t know who has which role until Night, when they’ll have private communication for this sort of thing anyhow. If you can give more detail on the precise strategy I’m meant to be trying to share so urgently I’ll try and address your points but right now I don’t see what my motivation is meant to be. Oh, and **Cookies** , I’ve played one game as scum, under my other alias of Stanislaus - I was Martyr in the Undying War.) ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2009, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/268 "2009-12-07T23:15:37Z")
> [@Drain\_Bead](#): > > **peeker** , you said something (feeding baby so can’t go back to search) about how you’d lynch the hell out of the first person who brought up the whole Miller thing. So why are you not voting for **Freudian** right now? :rolleyes: I’m really starting to think that I should just post assholish diatribes every time someone posts something innocuous. Then maybe I’ll get people defending me as vehemently as they have been with **peeker**. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/269 "2009-12-08T00:20:16Z")
**HEY!!!** I know that no one has mentioned it, but I worded the Scum win condition poorly. As it’s stated, the Scum have to be the only ones left alive. I wanted it to be that the Scum win when the SK is dead and they have at least as many players as the Town. I’m certain that everyone picked up on my intent. In any case, once the Scum control the vote, they’d lynch all the Town anyway. So, a corrected Scum Win Condition: You win when the SK is dead and the number of living Scum players is equal to or greater than half of the number of living players. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/270 "2009-12-08T00:49:50Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > :rolleyes: I’m really starting to think that I should just post assholish diatribes every time someone posts something innocuous. Then maybe I’ll get people defending me as vehemently as they have been with **peeker**. Actually, while I’m probably more suspicious of you than I am of anyone right now, I’m not defending **peeker** by asking that question. It could be that there’s a Scummy reason he decided not to put his money where his mouth is in this case. ---
**Author:** ![ToeJam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@ToeJam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ToeJam)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/271 "2009-12-08T03:22:12Z")
> [@Rin\_Twisted](#): > > Hee! It’s ma’am, my dear jammer of toes. I apologize for the mistake. I have not seen your name around, but now I will try to keep this in mind 🙂 > [@Red\_Skeezix](#): > > There are some things that I disagree with about this post. > > 1. The cop can’t start building a masonry once the roleblocker is dead. There is a scum godfather. Until the godfather is confirmed dead, the cop can’t confirm a single player. And those players who investigated town won’t be confirmed until the cop is dead. I dislike the first bullet. I think building a “semi-masonry” is fine. It excludes potential scum goons and the SK, and it allows the Vig a chance of not killing a townie. If we have 3 suspects named by the cop who are “town” that’s still better information for the Vig/Roleblocker (assuming that the GF isn’t the last one left) to focus their efforts elsewhere rather than just on everyone. In the end game of course we’ll have to be paranoid. But up to then, it’s a good way to at least bring the game to better Town odds. As for the \*\*Drainbead/Amrussel \*\*issue on miswording. It just looks very confusion to me. I’d rather simply just be suspicious of them both rather than try to pick from one currently until more information is known. There’s just too much WIFOM. Though i have more thoughts i suppose on the matter. When I read it I could see what amrussel was saying, however, I could see how one could read into some of his messages as trying to pass hints on to the other scum- though it seems a risky strategy to do so. > [@pedescribe](#): > > Whoa–I didn’t even notice that first time around. Call me hasty, but that’s good enough for a vote from me. :smack: I got nothing on that. Put him onto the list. Though it seems that if we’re on the whole “baiting” conversation that we could say that perhaps DB ‘baited’ Peds just as Peds ‘baited’ Freudian, or perhaps simply that Amrussel realized all this and secretly baited DB AND Peds in order to establish himself as the Master Baiter. Only time will tell. Also, is it just me or does anyone else have a hard time separating \*\*Peeker \*\*from **Pedescribe**? The two names tend to blend together for me and I keep associating things with one or the other. Perhaps the Vig should look into this problem? (KIDDING!!:D) Back to more serious things in the next post. ---
**Author:** ![ToeJam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@ToeJam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ToeJam)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/272 "2009-12-08T03:32:42Z")
> [@peekercpa](#): > > i don’t know that anyone cuts me slack. matter of fact my shelf life is about the same as shrimp on a hot day. i am scum’s worst nightmare because i agitate. > ? Does this actually work? I would say that such behavior isn’t really helpful for the town though, as it makes you highly manipulable to scum and basically a free lynch for them. You said it best yourself- “shelf life is about the same as shrimp on a hot day”. That’s… not a good thing, **peeks**. It would seem that you’d be just as likely to rile up some townies rather than scum and easily start bandwagons and such. I view that as not the most helpful behavior, though if you say that it’s been proven to work- then fine. It’s not my call to knock. But it sounds highly dubious. > [@amrussell](#): > > 1. **Tom Scud** and \*\*Zeriel \*\*are on my wavelength re. the interpretation of “should”. > 2. Secret messages? Any post that discusses what scum might do, or not do in a given situation is open to the interpretation that it’s scum covertly talking to scum, and I realised that when I made my post. That said, I’m not sure what the exact message is I’m meant to be trying to convey. Here’s the suspect quote: > > > [@](#): > > > > If we get to the point where the best strategy for scum is to sacrifice one of their 3 remaining players, I’ll be perfectly happy. More to the point, as I have no ability to enforce this policy on the town, I’m not too worried that I’m painting us into any kind of corner. > > I really don’t see what the secret message could be there other than. “It would be bad for scum to lose their roleblocker,” which is true but not something that so desperately needs to be spelt out on Day One that it would be worth breaking cover to say. Especially if, as suggested, scum won’t know who has which role until Night, when they’ll have private communication for this sort of thing anyhow. If you can give more detail on the precise strategy I’m meant to be trying to share so urgently I’ll try and address your points but right now I don’t see what my motivation is meant to be. I suppose I’m on your should “wavelength”, but I do have issues with the 2nd quote you just provided. It’s easy to read into that one- the underlined portion seems to be well… very odd. Can you not see how that message could be read if one thinks you’re Scum? I would love a clarification though- because it does read as if you’re saying you’re volunteering to be bussed for the sake of a more powerful scum. You also mention your inexperience as playing scum. So if scum knew at least if you were scum, they could easily read that as you volunteering yourself and saying you are just a minor scum, and perhaps a bit less experienced than your partners. That should things go by the wayside, that you would not mind being bussed basically. Which is QUITE a bit of reasoning and a leap to make though I must admit. But it does not hurt to be paranoid. This combined with my early thoughts of suspicion with both you and DB together does make me wonder. Could you perhaps explain or clarify the matter better? If you wish to make it official, I shall vote for you for now, with the regards that I am prone to changing my mind upon more information. But I do like leaving a paper trail of thoughts and votes. So let it be known that at the end of Monday I suppose, I will: Vote Amrussel -because his 2nd quoted message seems an odd point to reiterate, especially since I thought most people were having issues with the “Should” quote- which you explained in your first point. So why did you bring up a separate quote, one that seems more suspicious than the first, and mention again what would be bad situations for the SCUM? Why not focus on what’d be bad for TOWN rather than the problems scum would run into? Let them think it out on their own, and all that. So yes- i find it quite curious your 2nd message more than your first as it seems to be emphasizing the wrong things. But I would love to hear more from you on the matter. Thanks in advance. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/273 "2009-12-08T03:33:02Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > :rolleyes: I’m really starting to think that I should just post assholish diatribes every time someone posts something innocuous. Then maybe I’ll get people defending me as vehemently as they have been with **peeker**. Protesting too much? You’re better than this, calm down a skooch. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/274 "2009-12-08T03:46:52Z")
Because I’m not alive in any games right now and I’ve got nothing better to do than post Vote Counts in my “Most Helpful Mod” sorta way. **Vote Count** with about 2 days, 22 hours and 14 minutes to go 12 Votes required to start Countdown. (peak vote in Parenthesis) **2 Votes** \*\*\*amrussell \*\*(2 #218) Pedescribe (208 235), Rin Twisted (218), ToeJam (272) **1 Vote** **Pedescribe** (1 #86) ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (86) **Mahaloth** (1 #135) peekercpa (135) **Freduian Slit** (1 #230) Zeriel (230) \ ***Lynch Leader** **Not Voting** : Mahaloth, Nanook, Tom Scud, Drain Bead, Freudian Slit, USCDiver, DiggitCamara, storyteller, Ichini Sanshigo, Red Skeezix, MHaye, amrussel, GuiriEnEspaña, Mental Guy, pedescribe ---
**Author:** ![MentalGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/439d5e/32.png) [@MentalGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MentalGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/275 "2009-12-08T05:15:31Z")
Well, I am finally getting a chance to respond to some of this. I find Day 1’s difficult because while I can usually keep up with the reading fairly well, I often dont’ have time to post before a big new bunch of posts come up. After a quick review, I was surprised I did not have a lot to comment about. Regarding whether the vig and rb should act the first Night, I doubt it makes a lot of difference. I am guessing that in most games, if you changed what they did the first Night to the opposite, the end result of the game would not have changed. In those instances where it would have changed, I would think it is about 50/50 whether the change was in the Town’s favor. That said, my personal preference is for the vig not to fire totally random, but he or she does not need an overwhelming reason to fire. I am for letting the roleblocker decide for themselves whether they should do anything Night 1. As far as Freudian’s feud with peeker, I don’t really find either one of them scummy based on this. I have at times had trouble understanding peeker, though I thought what he meant in this case was clear. When I saw Freudian’s response to it, though, I assumed she had just misunderstood it. Her response was the last thing that someone that actually understood what peeker said would have written. Of course making a legitimate mistake does not mean she isn’t scum, and her reactions to being told she was wrong have pinged me a bit. pede is pinging me somewhat, not necessarily for a specific instance, but his overall play in this game. He just seems to be eager to latch onto something, then just as quick to let it go. Sort of like he is looking for something that might start a train on someone. With that said, though, while we are always looking for what scum might be doing to drive the lynch on Day 1, it has been my experience that scum don’t usually try to drive things on Day 1. They just sit back and let the Town fight among itself (when I say sit back, I don’t mean they don’t get involved, just that they don’t usually try to drive an agenda). The case against amrussell is the most compelling to me right now and if I had to place a vote now, it would be on him. I want to go back and study it over a bit more, though. I should have more comment on it tomorrow. There are several people in this game I have not played with before, but none of them other than amrussell have really done anything that has stood out to me. Well, I need to get to bed. I hope to have more to say tomorrow. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Skeezix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/aca169/32.png) [@Red\_Skeezix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Skeezix)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 7:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/276 "2009-12-08T07:12:22Z")
Just throwing out my suspicions right now. It’ll be brief, since at this late hour I’m way too lazy to dig up all the relevant quotes. Right now it’s **freudian slit** , **Guiri** and **amrussell**. (No particular order). **freudian slit** : You seem to be escalating your defensive stance in a manner that is not in proporation to the simple questions and confusions that have been brought up with regards to your interactions with peeker. This seems more suspicious than any actual opinion that you’ve made; more simply put it could be me reacting poorly to your style of play. **amrussell** : No one was talking about that quote you pointed out as “possible scum message”, in fact the quotes in question were already discussed. This seems like willful obfuscation. **guiri** : Helpful townie, factual information posts as main contribution so far. This mode of play pings me. It allows for the appearance of participation in discussion without actually saying anything other than that you remember where the rules are written down. Also, in another post, you mention that you enjoy/appreciate the discussion of the mechanics, but do not offer an opinion of the topics being discussed. (Dis)Honorable mentions to **Rin Twisted** : I don’t know what to make of your plays so far, you’ve shut down the roleblocking discussion which was not being productive (yet). This is slightly pinging me because you cannot possibly know where a discussion would lead and whether it would bear useful fruit until it dies a natural death. Secondly, you were the first to bring up the amrussell’s post as a secret scum message theory. I for the life of me cannot think of what would be so important for a scum to communicate that they would make such a risky play so early. Also, your initial pointing out of it, could be read as a “Message Received, good buddy”, a warning off of similar plays, or some such nonsense. === Toe Jam: Point taken on the semi-confirmed disagreement. I can see that there is some merit in what you/amrussell were saying. I have to keep reminding myself that there is no secret roles and this is a completely open game. ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 9:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/277 "2009-12-08T09:11:28Z")
> [@Red\_Skeezix](#): > > **guiri** : Helpful townie, factual information posts as main contribution so far. This mode of play pings me. It allows for the appearance of participation in discussion without actually saying anything other than that you remember where the rules are written down. Also, in another post, you mention that you enjoy/appreciate the discussion of the mechanics, but do not offer an opinion of the topics being discussed. /snip I have stated that **Peeker** ’s play has been consistent with his usual play (although refreshingly coherent). I had not seen anything scummy in **Amrussel** ’s wording although **Tom** ’s Devil’s Advocate comment gave some food for thought and **Zeriel** ’s latest comment does make the case against him somewhat stronger. I’m very curious about **Freudian** ’s self-defence posts as rather than simply saying “Oops, I misinterpreted that”, she continued to attack but I’m not sure if that behavior fits a Day 1 scum attemptiing to stay under the radar or a townie who’s trying to get themselves out of a hole. In terms of general strategy, yes, I find the suggestions and comments to be of interest but have not felt the compulsion to add to them from my minimal experience - there are a lot of very experienced players in this game and so I’m probably a little hesitant to say something that could be either wrong or dumb. I have no idea what our Vig or Roleblocker should do toNight and agree that they should decide what they think is best but this seemed to be the general consensus so I figured it was redundant to say it again. Trust me, when I feel I have something to add, I will. And if I see something suspicious, I’ll bring it up. I’m not afraid to ruffle feathers - I just haven’t been the first to notice potential slips or scummy comments so far… ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/278 "2009-12-08T10:17:05Z")
OK, from the top. First of all, a couple of people have questioned the quote I included in my post: > [@Red\_Skeezix](#): > > **amrussell** : No one was talking about that quote you pointed out as “possible scum message”, in fact the quotes in question were already discussed. This seems like willful obfuscation. > [@ToeJam](#): > > -because his 2nd quoted message seems an odd point to reiterate, especially since I thought most people were having issues with the “Should” quote- which you explained in your first point. > So why did you bring up a separate quote, one that seems more suspicious than the first, and mention again what would be bad situations for the SCUM? Contrary to what you both said, Rin Twisted had brought up precisely the quote I was defending, and dismissed the “should” quote\*\* as the reason to vote for me.\*\* So funnily enough, that was the quote I focused on. > [@Rin\_Twisted](#): > > I want to say upfront that I don’t think amrussell had a ‘slip’ with ‘we’ or anything like that. I think it’s pretty clear the ‘we’ means town, even. But these posts are pinging my radar. Here’s another one I don’t like: > > > [@amrussell](#): > > > > If we get to the point where the best strategy for scum is to sacrifice one of their 3 remaining players, I’ll be perfectly happy. More to the point, as I have no ability to enforce this policy on the town, I’m not too worried that I’m painting us into any kind of corner. > > This was a day start game, and that means scum didn’t have any chance to talk to one another and form some plans before the game started. This reads to me as possible attempts at subtle direction of the troops, so to speak. Vote amrussell I’m not going to apologise for, or defend, quoting and explaining the posts that people are using as grounds to vote for me. And really, if you’re going to challenge me on my posts, it’s your responsibility to make sure those challenges are based in fact. Moving on to the content of that quote, and some other issues raised by ToeJam: > [@ToeJam](#): > > I suppose I’m on your should “wavelength”, but I do have issues with the 2nd quote you just provided. > It’s easy to read into that one- the underlined portion seems to be well… very odd. > Can you not see how that message could be read if one thinks you’re Scum? > I would love a clarification though- because it does read as if you’re saying you’re volunteering to be bussed for the sake of a more powerful scum. > You also mention your inexperience as playing scum. > > So if scum knew at least if you were scum, they could easily read that as you volunteering yourself and saying you are just a minor scum, and perhaps a bit less experienced than your partners. That should things go by the wayside, that you would not mind being bussed basically. To be honest, I _don’t_ see how that message could be read if one thinks I’m scum. I’m saying that: IF we kill the Roleblocker, AND the best strategy for scum is to then sacrifice another player (as suggested by **RedSkeezix** in the post I was replying to) then that will be a _good situation for town_ (hence, I’ll be happy). I really don’t see where I’m meant to be volunteering to be bussed there. But more to the point, why on earth would I be jumping up and down to offer this sacrifice in the game thread? On Day One? There is absolutely no need or motivation for scum to do this. So it looks like the accusation is that, not only am I scum, but I’m \*also \*minor scum \*and \* I am both so eager and so dumb that I can’t resist blurting out my best thoughts on scum strategy in the middle of the game thread for all to read, long before they would actually become relevant. > [@ToeJam](#): > > Why not focus on what’d be bad for TOWN rather than the problems scum would run into? Let them think it out on their own, and all that. Because I’ve noticed that in pretty much all strategy discussions town has, we only ever focus on what town want to do. And we never even think about what our opponents are doing. In any \*strategic \*game, from chess to football, you \*need \*to consider what your opponents strategy is, so you can effectively counteract it. Thinking about what scum are trying to achieve helps us look for them, by sharpening up our ideas of what motivations will be prompting their posts and actions here. As for letting them think it out on their own, that’s the last thing we want to do. They can see everything we see, and (save for a handful of Night actions) can see everything we do. And they’re collaborating closely. The more we attempt to predict what they will do, the better prepared we are for it but also - the fewer options it gives them. It’s already been suggested that as a result of what I’ve posted, scum might choose not to do certain things. Brilliant! We’re curtailing scum’s ability to act. We’re shutting down their options. They are reacting to us, rather than us reacting to them. Getting your opponents on the back foot is how you win games. ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 11:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/279 "2009-12-08T11:41:55Z")
@ **amrussel** , your explanation seems quite reasonable to me but it is possible to interpret the quote both ways - townie happy that scum lose a member of their team or scum happy to be thrown under the bus as needed. What makes me doubt the case against you, as you mentioned, is what scum motivation a scummy you would have to try to give this message in what was effectively your first post when no-one seemed to be in any danger… ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Skeezix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/aca169/32.png) [@Red\_Skeezix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Skeezix)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2009, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729/280 "2009-12-08T14:02:12Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > I’m not going to apologise for, or defend, quoting and explaining the posts that people are using as grounds to vote for me. And really, if you’re going to challenge me on my posts, it’s your responsibility to make sure those challenges are based in fact. Hrm. See what you are saying, I must have missed that quote in his post when I was re-reading what his accusations were. (Probably because it was a quote that was attributed in text, and not in the quote box, and I was skimming). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/colorless-mafia/519729.md?page=15)