# Evil Dead Mafia II - Teaser and Sign-Ups \[Game On!\] **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [September 29, 2010, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493 "2010-09-29T17:35:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 121
**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:** [October 29, 2010, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2401 "2010-10-29T12:17:13Z")
> [@brewha](#): > > Serious non snark question here. What are you trying to say in the bolded (by me) sentence? Late vote? Let’s vote?? > > I really have no idea how to defend against a sentence I can’t comprehend. In case you missed the NETA post, I was trying to say “a late vote for peeks”, but the struggle against my misfiring synapses was too great. ---
**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:** [October 29, 2010, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2402 "2010-10-29T12:42:01Z")
> [@special\_ed](#): > > Interesting theory. > > From our dead Scum so far, Telcontar, Astral, and peeker, do you think that they’d be likely to pick Nanook as Scum? I see it as certainly plausible. Assuming the 3 of them were all original Scum, their choice would have come from: I don’t really have a lot of insight into them; I think I played one game with Telcontar and got vigged on Night 1 (Lost); I’ve never played with Astral; and peeker. I’d imagine Astral would have deferred to the more experienced scum. I have a hard time seeing the scum pick Astral (too new) or peeker (too erratic; gets lynched a lot early here). Telcontar could have been their pick. So anyway I’m stuck with what I’d consider a good strategy. Of the other living players, I’d put you, Normal, NAF, Drain, and Cookies on Tier 1 (except that you’re all pretty loud); I know Hal and Total Lost have good reputations on Idle so maybe some of the Idle players (like Peeker) would have gone that way. I don’t know if Telcontar has played much on Idle. amStanislaus is also a good low-volume player, but I’m not sure that with the name change people he would stand out. Guiri is good but still relatively new; Natlaw just didn’t occur to me which maybe is a recommendation for him. Also, I probably wouldn’t have picked Drain after her in-thread request just because I wouldn’t want to deal with her being grumpy all over the scum board. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2403 "2010-10-29T13:04:30Z")
I’ll play the scumbuddy-picking game, but only because I’m sitting here with too little time to do anything more useful, not because I think it’s a really useful speculation to engage in. (That said, I think Tom Scud’s observations on Nanook are decent enough on their own merits.) My top five scumbuddy picks, in no particular order The friend I’d like to be mafia with for real, just once – Mrs McGinty The scum player _par excellence_ – peeker The promising newbie who deserved much better from his last outing than what he got – Astral The quieter player who often makes it to the end because he never puts a foot wrong and is rarely seen as a threat – USCDiver The guy I’d just rather not play against, tyvm – Guiri ---
**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:** [October 29, 2010, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2404 "2010-10-29T13:38:00Z")
> [@special\_ed](#): > > It’s more of a theory than a case, isn’t it? It’s a theory AND a case; there’s also the pushback on peeker and the (pre-investigation) pressure on NAF. ---
**Author:** ![TexCat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/texcat/32/9041_2.png) [@TexCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TexCat)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2405 "2010-10-29T13:59:36Z")
**Vote: Suburban** On my relook at Suburban, I was struck my 2 things. First, what an extensive and thorough case Normal made. Second, there seemed to be quite a difference between the way Suburb treated Romanic’s slip and the way he treated peeker’s slip. Suburb seems to go back and forth on Romanic’s “4 scum” remark, but votes him anyway and says in [516](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12990564&postcount=516),“I’m a bit bothered by Romanic’s refusal to make a role claim, but \*only \*a bit.” In contrast, he seems to defend peeker, but when it becomes apparant that peeker will be lynched, he votes peeker based solely on peeker’s lack of claim. ---
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2406 "2010-10-29T14:09:44Z")
I think Scum would have been delighted to pick **Astral** , because, while he’s only played one game, he played it as Scum and was fantastic. His newness would have been a further attraction because it would throw suspicion off him. **Peeker** ’s more of a toss-up. Yes, he’s really erratic. But by the same token, everything and nothing he does seems Scummy, whether he’s Town or Scum. He could have stood up and sung the Scum National Anthem in this thread, and _I_ still would have figured it was **Peeker** being **Peeker** , not a Scum tell. If I had been Definite Scum\* trying to choose an additional Scum player, my first choice in a red hot second would have been **Stanislaus**. He was Scum’s nemesis in Evil Dead 1, and would certainly be _the_ player I didn’t want to play against. But I’ve never seen him in any other Game, so if I were a more experienced player, there might be reasons not to recruit him or to want someone else even more. Evil Dead 1 looms heavily in my mind, but not necessarily in the minds of the Definite Scum. **Tom Scud** ’s argument for **Nanook** is valid, but I’d think It would apply almost as well to **Guiri** , **Tom** ’s previous incarnation. Plus **Idle Thoughts** , whom we know to have been Town, was very suspicious of him. But, as I said earlier in post #2268, I’m not inclined to think **Guiri** / **Tom Scud** is Scum. Third party, maybe. The rest of **Tom** ’s case on **Nanook** looks good, but no better than that on **Surburn Plankton**. So, I think for now I will leave my vote where it is, on **Surburban**. The outcome of his lynch and the events of the Night will tell us a lot. \*Definite Scum - the Scum players who were originally notified that they were Scum and had to choose the last Scum player. ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2407 "2010-10-29T14:39:07Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > In case you missed the NETA post, I was trying to say “a late vote for peeks”, but the struggle against my misfiring synapses was too great. Funny thing was that I saw the “late vote” NETA the first time through. Then, when I went back to respond to it, I read the “let Vote” in your post and didn’t bother to continue to the next one. Anywho, The reason I bring it up is that I really don’t think that my vote was a late one. It’s not like I voted right before the lynch. And with so many people already on the bandwagon, my vote really didn’t matter anyway. I gotta go back and look at the timeline, but I think you’re being a bit misleading on this point too. ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2408 "2010-10-29T14:45:31Z")
NVM, the vote that I was thinking of was the Telcontar one. My vote on Peeks was a bit late, but I did encourage him to stop playing like ass if he was town. It was only after he started posting gibberish that I was sure he was scum and voted for him. It seems to me that a smart scum move would be to vote for Peeker before he had his meltdown. Or a smart Peeker move would be to wait til all his scum buddies were on his bandwagon before throwing himself under the bus. Of course, this all falls under the “Scum would never do that” line of reasoning that is never very convincing. ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2409 "2010-10-29T16:35:21Z")
Just checking in at the moment to say I’m still here. My participation the last couple of days has been next to nil for a couple reasons: work has been busy, and I’ve been hammered by a bad cold. so no real opportunity to post during the day, and in the evening I’ve had enough energy to watch baseball or watch this thread…and the World Series has been a lot more entertaining that this game the last couple days… Today is the office Halloween festivities, so no actual work is getting done, and there’s no game tonight, so I should be able to contribute some ‘final thoughts’ before the end of the Day. ---
**Author:** ![Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc8723/32.png) [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nanook_of_the_North_Shore)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2410 "2010-10-29T17:31:03Z")
That kind of meta-analysis isn’t really all that useful. It’s not possible to defend against, and different people will have different ideas on what makes the best scum. Personally, I would have gone for someone I consider a strong player. Guiri has impressed me, Naf is always a good choice, maybe someone else. To be honest, I haven’t really spent much time thinking about it. Since it was done so early, you don’t have to worry about the usual recruitment difficulties. Just normal scum hunting will work fine. As for the rest of it… While you say you see the scum motivation pushing back on the peeker case, let’s be honest with each other. Those intital votes on peeker WERE terrible. His “slip” doesn’t make any sense at all as a slip. And you’ll note, I’m far from the only person to have said that at the time or since then. My later voting for him makes perfect sense, and doesn’t require me to be scum buddies with him giving me the ok for it. His reaction to the terrible votes was equally terrible. He changed who caused his confusion from Naf to Idle and back, plus changing which post was the source. Then add in the refusal to post a PM. It was quite clear that while the slip was bunk, it rattled him and he was panicking. This indicates scum or PFK, since a Town player has no reason to panick. You’ll note I didn’t end up voting for Naf. This is because as I thought through the implications of the slip not really being one, I realized that Naf wasn’t therefore immediately implicated. Obviously, since he’s been investiated, he’s most likely Town, which once again, indicates that peeker’s slip was anything but. The rest of your “case”, such as it is, is pretty much junk. I didn’t post much substance on a Day we had a scum in hand? What a shock. ---
**Author:** ![lilflower](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@lilflower](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lilflower)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2411 "2010-10-29T18:21:18Z")
> [@TexCat](#): > > Perhaps, but the fact remains, that I did vote for someone and explained my admittedly rather feeble reasons for doing so. I have not yet voted toDay, but did explain who I was looking at, and I will vote with an explanation before the end of the dAy. Perhaps you should instead look at people who have actually failed to find someone to vote for. My Day 1 chart shows Nanook, peeker, and Suburb without votes down. Day 2 on my chart shows Hal Briston, One and Only, and Total Lost without votes down. (We haven’t had a lot of vote tallies by the mod, so I won’t swear by the accuracy of my chart. Corrections welcomed.) I admitted to having some problems choosing whom to vote for, but I have voted and left a firm record. > > On preview, I see that Ed has explained that Drain has claimed town librarian. Oy was pretty clearly referring to Drain as the librarian. I know you have voted but when you add a disclaimer that the reasons for voting are feeble and the person you voted for turns up town, it’s easy to say, “well, I told you my reasons for voting were bad.” However, I see that toDay you voted and it looks like a pretty good case, actually. I haven’t been that convinced on the Suburban case but I think I will go back and re-read his reactions to Romanic and Peeker. If he did treat them differently because of the claim issue, that is a good reason to vote for him. **unvote TexCat** ---
**Author:** ![lilflower](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecccb3/32.png) [@lilflower](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lilflower)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2412 "2010-10-29T22:09:03Z")
I went back to look at \*\*SP’\*\*s reaction to **Romanic**. This is his vote post. > [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > Well, I appear to have arrived a little late to the party this morning…I don’t have much to add that hasn’t already been said before (but I won’t let that stop me). A couple thoughts: > > [ul] > [li]I agree that 4 Scum among 30 players seems like a ‘lower than normal’ number. On the other hand, when was the last time any of you played a ‘normal’ game of Mafia?[/li][li]I’m a bit bothered by Romanic’s refusal to make a role claim, but \*only \*a bit. I agree with the points made concerning the value of Claiming at this point, but consider this: It’s only Tuesday. We still have something like 4 days left before Dusk. That’s a long time for ‘something else’ to pop up that is more suspicious that Romanic’s slip-up. He might simply be biding his time to see if he really needs to Claim or not. If that’s the case, I think that suggests that he had something to hide, but that could equally likely mean he’s Scum \*or \*a Town Power.[/li][/ul] > > As I said, there’s a long way to go before Dusk, but at this point I don’t think we can overlook this particular faux-pas. > > **vote Romanic** He says that a lot could happen before the end of the Day yet votes for \*\*Romanic \*\*anyway. Then there is this post which is also interesting since **SP** basically says he is not likely to believe\*\* Romanic\*\*'s vanilla claim. > [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > Good point. If Romanic is town, then this might be one of those cases where he just needs to suck it up and take one for the team. > > Of course, if he claims Vanilla, it’s likely that nobody is going to believe him anyway… In this post, he does seem to be giving \*\*peeker \*\*more leeway after the PIS accusation, whereas with **Romanic** , he seemed more quick to vote. But then there is this post where **SP** asks \*\*peeker \*\*to post his PM. Although he still hasn’t voted for him. He seems more willing to give \*\*peeker \*\*a chance regarding the role claim. > [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > I’ve got to agree. I felt all along that the bandwagon against peeker built up steam awfully fast, and was based on pretty thin reasoning, but I can’t understand his reluctance here. If peeker is vanilla Town, as he has claimed, then I can’t imagine how revealing his PM is going to help Scum, as he said a while back. > > peeker, come out with it. Otherwise, I can’t see any other conclusion than you’re lying about something, or perhaps everything. He mentions the lack of posting the PM again [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13022232&postcount=1467), but still no vote. Then [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13024706&postcount=1521), once the bandwagon is at full steam and **SP** even admits his vote isn’t needed, he does vote **peeker**. He does seem to have treated the \*\*peeker \*\*situation differently than **Romanic** ’s. Both were accused of PIS but he voted \*\*Romanic \*\*much earlier in the process than he did \*\*peeker \*\*when both were being pressured to claim. So the question is, why would a scummy **SP** do this? It seems to me that he saw an easy vote on townie \*\*Romanic \*\*but didn’t want to jump on the \*\*peeker \*\*bandwagon too soon lest he end up with a swing vote for a scum buddy. Once it was pretty clear that \*\*peeker \*\*was going to be lynched, he jumped on even though he knew his vote wasn’t needed. Also, I finally went back and read **Normal** ’s post 2088 which I have subtitled “War and Peace” and see that she is making a similar argument. I don’t understand the whole “scum don’t need a defense” case but this one that \*\*Normal \*\*picked up on makes sense to me. **vote Suburban Plankton** ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2413 "2010-10-30T00:59:43Z")
> [@lilflower](#): > > I know you have voted but when you add a disclaimer that the reasons for voting are feeble and the person you voted for turns up town, it’s easy to say, “well, I told you my reasons for voting were bad.” > > However, I see that toDay you voted and it looks like a pretty good case, actually. I haven’t been that convinced on the Suburban case but I think I will go back and re-read his reactions to Romanic and Peeker. If he did treat them differently because of the claim issue, that is a good reason to vote for him. > > **unvote TexCat** This unvote makes absolutely no sense to me. lilflower votes for TexCat because “I have found it a pretty reliable scum-tell that someone cannot find anyone to vote for”. A while later, TexCat votes for me. > [@TexCat](#): > > **Vote: Suburban** > > On my relook at Suburban, I was struck my 2 things. First, what an extensive and thorough case Normal made. Second, there seemed to be quite a difference between the way Suburb treated Romanic’s slip and the way he treated peeker’s slip. Suburb seems to go back and forth on Romanic’s “4 scum” remark, but votes him anyway and says in [516](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12990564&postcount=516),“I’m a bit bothered by Romanic’s refusal to make a role claim, but \*only \*a bit.” In contrast, he seems to defend peeker, but when it becomes apparant that peeker will be lynched, he votes peeker based solely on peeker’s lack of claim. Based on this, lilflower unvotes TexCat, saying “I see that toDay you voted and it looks like a pretty good case, actually.” Except TexCat doesn’t actually make a case. He says that Normal makes a good case, and then restates one of the arguments that Normal had made, adding in on observation of his own. Also, this vote does nothing to address the reason that lilflower voted him in the first place. If she thought that “not being able to find someone to vote for” is a Scum tell, then how if “finally placing a vote on someone who is already guaranteed to be lynched” any better? But it does fit in with lilflower’s voting record in this game: Romanic - 8th vote Oredigger - 3rd vote peeker - 13th vote Telcontar - 5th vote TexCat - 1st vote Suburban - 11th vote The only votes that were placed on someone who wasn’t basically a guaranteed lynch were those on TexCat and Oredigger, and Oredigger was already a strong ‘second choice’ when Romanic hit the road. ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2414 "2010-10-30T02:25:12Z")
So I figured I should take a look at Normal Phase, and see if I could find an ulterior motive behind his dogged pursuit of me. It seems reasonable to assume that he’sgoing to come under some suspicion once I flip Town, so I figured perhaps I could help or hinder the case against him. Unfortunately I don’t have the energy for a comprehensive analysis, but I was able to scan through all of his posts and pick out a few things that stood out to me. \*\*He was the first person to cast a vote on Telcontar. Though he changed it a couple of times, his suspicion of Telcontar never wavered, and he did wind up with a vote on him in the end. \*_He’s very happy about his “magic bag”. He first mentions it in Post 1432, responding to a post of lilflower’s shortly after his partial claim: “Sorry, I’m rather liking my magic bag right at the moment. It goes well with my shoes.” Later, responding to a question by NAF (Post 1837): "You weren’t. However, you were known (barring weird shenanigans or Idle being a liar_) not to be a Deadite, which is more information than is available on the rest of us. Oy had a choice of confirming you (pretty much) the rest of the way, or of getting significant information on someone unknown. (He could have taken a look in my magic bag, for instance, or gone after a new suspect.) I’d like to know what he was thinking when he decided that you were his best choice, in that light." And a bit after that, in Post 1878: “Sometimes, I really like you. Want to trade magic bags?” The odd thing is that I don’t think anybody else has ever mentioned Normal’s magic bag. Why does he keep reminding all of us that he has it? And looking at his “claim”: > [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > While all this conversation is no doubt illuminating to those who have the time to actually read it, I have something additional to add: > > Having asked for and gotten clarification from Storyteller, I can say definitively that **Chipacabra died last night protecting me**. Make of that what you will. At this point I have no intentions of revealing anything more about my role. However, it does provide additional lines of inquiry for the day: namely, the question of why I was attacked. I had voted for OneandonlyWanderers and Drain Bead in addition to my day-ending vote on Telcontar. I had also expressed suspicion of Mrs McGinty. (And I had somewhat defended NAF and Oy.) While it’s always possible I was attacked for some other reasons, the question of who stands to benefit does interest me, and I think it should count as a small mark against each of those four. > > My vote on Telcontar has carried over, and for now it will remain there. (As mentioned, though, I have no remotely caught up.) He never mentions any powers. He never says anything except that he somehow knows what Chipacabra was doing that fateful night. No mention of a magic bag until 150 posts later. \*\*He doesn’t seem to like when I ask questions to Oy. After I had asked Oy about the Astral Rejection/Tiny Demon/Trickster connection: > [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > This is one of several posts from Suburban that have pinged me – what’s the point of making an issue of this at all? You say yourself you saw it once you went back and looked at the write-up, so clearly there’s nothing suspicious about Oy commenting on it. It looks like you’re fishing for something you can hang a PIS charge on. > > That reminds me, though: Oy – why NAF for the investigation (and can you post the item description for that again)? After I asked Oy why she gave the flower to Drain Bead on Night 1: > [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > Who are you trying to get insight into by asking this question, SP? > > By the way, doing this review of your posts is about killing me. I hate this sort of thing so verrah, verrah much. Yet he has no problem himself asking Oy to explain himself… > [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > > [@Oy](#): > > > > Yes. I still found **NAF** to be suspicious, and if **Peeker** _did_ make a slip (we still don’t know one way or another), it was probably based on **NAF** in the Scum thread. > > > > The Godfather in Evil Dead 1 was human. Wouldn’t have shown up in **Idle** ’s touch. Could use the Necronomicon, or do the Night Kill, but otherwise had no special powers. I figured it was likely that **Storyteller** had provided at least one vanilla cover role. I thought **NAF** might have used it. > > > > Further, one of the things I thought was suspicious about **NAF** was his probing for info on Day 1. That could be a Serial Killer with restrictions, just as the two SKs in Evil Dead 1 had specific people they could and couldn’t kill. I figured that a Serial Killer would not come back as Vanilla Grizzled Cop. I could be wrong, but that was my thinking. > > > > Now, **NAF** could still be a human Scum Godfather whose real role is Grizzled Cop, but whose text differs from the one he posted. But other than that possibility, which I consider to be fairly small, he stands as pretty much confirmed Town. > > > > That was my thinking - that I’d either get a conclusively bad result, or a pretty solidly confirmed result wrt **NAF**. If you don’t consider my reasons adequate, well, sorry. I’m no expert at this, but I’m doing the best that I can. > > No, I’m not in the habit of second-guessing townies. I was asking in order to find out if you _are_ a townie. Can you provide a link or two to demonstrate your continued suspicion? and from three quotes above: > [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > That reminds me, though: Oy – why NAF for the investigation (and can you post the item description for that again)? \*\*He reads the game rules very well, except when he doesn’t. In Post 901, Hal Briston wonders how Normal knows that taking the book doesn’t interfere with Nihgt powers. Normal’s response one post later is > [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > In the rules, Hal. :dubious: Two hours later, he posts > [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > I think when it comes down to it I just hate making decisions based on what the scum might have thought was in their best interests. Who knows why they do what they do? **They might not even have day talk** , and in that case it’s even more iffy; it’d be down to Oredigger himself, what one single person thought was a good idea at the time. [bolding mine] So what does this all mean? I’d love to say that it proves conclusively that Normal is Mr. Scummy McScummerson. But it doesn’t. \*His early and continued pursuit of Telcontar certainly doesn’t scream “Scum!”. \*His love of his “magic bag” is a little odd, but doesn’t say Scum to me. I don’t see why Scum would continue to bring the subject up, since the only likely respnse would be to draw attention/suspicion. It sounds more like an attempt at WIFOM to me. \*I do think he’s being hypocritical when he keeps getting on me about my questioning of Oy. But I think that’s likely just a case of “I know this guy’s Scum, so I’m going to attack him at every possibility to see if I can make him crack”. \*And his selective reading of the rules probably just means he wasn’t paying attention when he read them. It’s possible that it’s indicative of the fact that he is Scum, and therefore knows full well that they have Day-talk, and is just feigning ignorance so that we’ll think he doesn’t know. But even I won’t make that argument at this point 🙂 If I had to hazard a guess at this point, I’d say that Normal is Town, though it’s always possible that he’s a Third Party. But I don’t think he’s Scum, trying to get me lynched because he thinks I’m an ‘easy’ target. I think he legitimately believes I’m Scum. He’s absolutely, completely, and unequivocally wrong, but I won’t hold it against him. ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2415 "2010-10-30T03:06:24Z")
A look at TexCat. Because she’s voting for me, and because she’s a low-volume poster (I’m not feeling well, so I don’t have the energy to tackle much more tonight). She was suspicious early on of NAF for taking the book, and bringing up the idea of a mass claim. She votes NAF when he claims to have lost the book, and unvotes NAF after Idle’s claim. But she waffles a bit on peeker. in Post 1412 > [@TexCat](#): > > I am happy to leave my vote on NAF. I thought he was suspicious for his wanting to hold on the book and still think he is suspicious for it. Idle’s logic regarding NAF seems to baffle me. **But I agree that peeker looks bad.** I thought his original halucination was easily explained by Idle’s post, but then when he went back to 1095?? It started looking more like a scum trying to explain away a slip. and now in Post 1573 > [@TexCat](#): > > I’m inclined to believe Idle. **I’m not seeing a vote on peeker.** I think his slip only makes sense if NAF is scum. peeker did say he thought NAF _said_ he no longer had the book, not just that NAF no longer had it. > > I need to take a closer look at Idle’s suspect list. [bolding mine] Of course, “peeker looks bad” is not incompatible with “I’m not seeing a vote on peeker”. Post 1667 > [@TexCat](#): > > Yuck. I have no idea who to vote for. As much as NAF still looks scummy to me, I mostly believe Idle’s claim. I also, oddly enough, believe peeker’s claim. Perhaps I am just too trusting? I would really like to not vote, but think that’s always wrong. And so I am going to vote on very feeble reasoning. Sorry, I’ve been out of town, but should be home again mid-week next week, and able to pay a little better attention to the game. > > **vote: drain bead** > > First, because Drain is always scum. Second, because she was asking scum not to pick her. Third, because first she seemed to say that NAF and peeker both had to be scum: > > but after Idle’s claim: This looks like a lot of wishy-washy crap that does not mesh well with her earlier statement. This looks bad. First of all, I have a very hard time believing that anyone could have believed peeker’s claim. And second, “because Drain is always scum” is way too meta-game to be a reason to vote someone, aside from being completely illogical. She votes for Telcontar. Null tell considering the circumstances. > [@TexCat](#): > > Yay! I know who to vote for toDay! Good work, Idle! > > \*\*unvote: drain bead \*\*(from yesterDay) > **final vote: telcontar** > > No news on the book? Could the book account for the extra death last night? She wonders why Drain Bead felt the need to Claim, and says she “doesn’t see a townie motivation for it”. She also questions why Drain’s PM says **GENERIC: Vanilla** , while Mahaloth’s who has a similar one-use power says **GENERIC: Special**. She leads the charge on Mahaloth based on oddities in his PM. And finally she votes for me. All in all, I’m not seeing a whole lot one way or another. Her suspicion of NAF made sense. Most of her votes were pretty non-controversial: NAF, Oredigger, Telcontar, me. I didn’t like her vote on Drain Bead, but her suspicion of Drain’s claim later isn’t out of line. In particular, I don’t see the case that lilflower made when she voted for TexCat. ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2416 "2010-10-30T03:32:57Z")
A couple last thoughts for this evening, then I’m off to bed. I made some comments a while back about Hal Briston’s lack of participation. Since that point, he has had this to say: [ul] [li]A full day’s discussion is to the advantage of Scum (in reference to Telcontar)[/li][li]He reminds us that he said he didn’t have the Book[/li][li]He thought that Drain should cast her spell last Night[/li][li]He voted for Mahaloth based on his PM[/li][/ul] I’m still waiting for the “actual discussion” that we were promised. Hal seems to be around, because he keeps sticking his head into the thread, but he apparently there is not much going on that he has any opinion about. My vote is still on Mrs McGinty. I still haven’t found anyone ‘better’ to vote for. Plus, I feel like my vote is largely irrelevant at this point. I don’t really see the rest of the Town following my lead on anything right now, unless I can find someone else with “Scum” carved in blood on their forehead. I don’t understand why McGinty unvoted me. His stated reason was > [@Mrs\_McGinty](#): > > I don’t want to actually obstruct the town, though. So I figure that the best I can do at this stage is to answer whatever questions people want to ask me. And since I’ve yet to follow up on my promise to look at other suspects, I’m going to **unvote: Suburban Plankton** , for the time being at least. I suppose it might be related to all of the other events of earlier Today; perhaps McGinty was feeling intimidated because of the ‘cultural differences’ and wanted to make sure he had an iron-clad case before casting another vote. But it’s been three days since then, and five days in all since he told us “I’ve still got a few leads to chase up on other players”…I’m still wondering if there were ever any leads to begin with. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2417 "2010-10-30T13:40:55Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > So I figured I should take a look at Normal Phase, and see if I could find an ulterior motive behind his dogged pursuit of me. It seems reasonable to assume that he’sgoing to come under some suspicion once I flip Town, so I figured perhaps I could help or hinder the case against him. Okay, let’s play! Generous snippage throughout. > [@](#): > > Unfortunately I don’t have the energy for a comprehensive analysis, but I was able to scan through all of his posts and pick out a few things that stood out to me. The stuff you thought you could twist to make me look scummy, you mean. Oh, and the Telcontar vote. Kind of hard to ignore that one and come across as at all even-handed. > [@](#): > > \*\*He was the first person to cast a vote on Telcontar. Though he changed it a couple of times, his suspicion of Telcontar never wavered, and he did wind up with a vote on him in the end. Ayup. > [@](#): > > \*\*He’s very happy about his “magic bag”. > > The odd thing is that I don’t think anybody else has ever mentioned Normal’s magic bag. Why does he keep reminding all of us that he has it? Because it amuses me. Seriously, when I got the clarification from Storyteller about what happened night one, I sort of metaphorically started laughing and haven’t really stopped since. And the more serious response, since it’s not clear from this whether you know it or not: I’m using “magic bag” to indicate something I’m not saying about my role, as a reference to my knowing about Chipacabra but refusing to say why or how. It’s not a literal thing. > [@](#): > > \*\*He doesn’t seem to like when I ask questions to Oy. > > After I had asked Oy about the Astral Rejection/Tiny Demon/Trickster connection: > After I asked Oy why she gave the flower to Drain Bead on Night 1: > > Yet he has no problem himself asking Oy to explain himself… Perfectly true and yet misleading – questions were rather differently focused. > [@](#): > > \*\*He reads the game rules very well, except when he doesn’t. I have to laugh at this one, because it’s true. About the best you can say about me and ever reading the rules is that I’m inconsistent. Nevertheless, you will note that information about the Book was in its own post, which I did read at the time. And again, due to a slight mis-quote from you: I said that taking of the Book during the Day doesn’t interfere with Night powers, not anything more general. > [@](#): > > So what does this all mean? I’d love to say that it proves conclusively that Normal is Mr. Scummy McScummerson. But it doesn’t. _nod_ > [@](#): > > And his selective reading of the rules probably just means he wasn’t paying attention when he read them. It’s possible that it’s indicative of the fact that he is Scum, and therefore knows full well that they have Day-talk, and is just feigning ignorance so that we’ll think he doesn’t know. But even I won’t make that argument at this point 🙂 You mean except for how you just did? > [@](#): > > If I had to hazard a guess at this point, I’d say that Normal is Town, though it’s always possible that he’s a Third Party. But I don’t think he’s Scum, trying to get me lynched because he thinks I’m an ‘easy’ target. I think he legitimately believes I’m Scum. Yup. Or third party (most of my case applies just as well to a third-party actor; only the peeker defense and possibly the watcher thing are non-tells in that scenario). And by the way, why the distinction in _your_ mind between third party and scum? You don’t think I’m scum, but “it’s always possible” I’m a third party. What exactly is it that’s allowing you to tell the difference? > [@](#): > > He’s absolutely, completely, and unequivocally wrong, but I won’t hold it against him. If I am wrong – thank you, that’s generous. I’ve been after you like a terrier for the better part of two weeks. It must be frustrating. Also, regarding your last post: Hal is very frustrating to me right now. How can you judge someone who offers nothing? ---
**Author:** ![Oy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bc8723/32.png) [@Oy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oy)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2418 "2010-10-30T13:54:45Z")
I checked yesterday, and it looks like **Hal** has made seven or eight posts on the SDMB since he posted here last, which was Oct 22. So it’s not like he hasn’t been on the Board at all. But in general he’s a pretty prolific poster - over 11,000 posts since he joined in 2003. On the other hand, I just went back and looked at Evil Dead 1, and **Hal** , playing Vanilla Town, was consistently a very low volume poster. So it looks as if this is his play style in general, and his low volume is not a Scum indication. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2419 "2010-10-30T14:43:23Z")
It is his play style, no question. But it is a very frustrating one. ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493/2420 "2010-10-30T16:06:50Z")
@Normal, You are very frustrating to me, because as you say you have been after me like a terrier for some time now. When I’m lynched, it will be in large part because of your in depth analysis. So I went looking to see what I cold find that would point to you being Scum. What was in my last post was the best I could come up with. As you noted, it’s not much. As for the ‘could be third party’ bit, that was sort of a ‘standard disclaimer’. The difference in my mind between ‘Scum’ and ‘Third Party’ is that the former know exactly who the Scum are, and the latter don’t. If you are Scum, then you know full well you are making a ‘bad case’ against me, because you know I’m not Scum. If you are third-party, then you are making a ‘legitimate case’ against me because you think I’m Scum. Of course there are a few more complexities to consider (with PFKs and other wincons and the like), but that’s the basis of the argument. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493.md?page=120) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/evil-dead-mafia-ii-teaser-and-sign-ups-game-on/555493.md?page=122)