Evil Dead Mafia II - Teaser and Sign-Ups [Game On!]

[Total_Lost]

@Mrs_McGinty

I’m now going to make good on my offer to shut the hell up. I think everyone will be happier that way.

Mafia-related:
Don’t shut up. Take a deep breath and remember it’s a game. We’re all playing a game.
Most of us to win.
Including those that don’t play your team. But also including those that play on your team.

Off-mafia:
Don’t shut up. Take a deep breath and remember it’s a game. We’re all playing a game.
Most of us to win.
Including those that don’t play your team. But also including those that play on your team.

[Total_Lost]

@Oy

Thanks, Story!

I went over the entire thread yesterday, not making notes, but just looking for gut feelings about anyone.

I had been suspicious of Normal Phase, because the coincidence of her just happening to be attacked and Chipacabra just happening to protect her seems so great. But I noted that she was one of the first (perhaps the first) to aggressively pursue a case against Telcontar, and I can certainly see Scum killing her over that. It does, however, throw a little bit of suspicion on Mrs McGinty, for arguing fairly strenuously that this might have been a Scum ruse to convince Town that they were on the wrong track.

The fact that Mrs McGinty and Peeker spent a full Day at each other’s throats while largely ignoring what else was going on also looks as if it could have been an intentional distraction. But as I’ve said before, I don’t get Peeker, never have, never will, and I can certainly understand being sufficiently exasperated by him to focus on him as Mrs McGinty did. Still, it might have been a clever little ploy between the two of them. So Mrs McGinty is on my suspect list, but not highly enough to get a vote.

Drain’s claim bugs me a little, because it’s just so hard to understand why she would be classified as Vanilla rather than Special. But, for the life of me, I can’t understand why she would change it if it were a cover role provided by Story, and the role reads like Story. In my reread, I have to admit that she pinged me a couple of times, but I just don’t see enough evidence to believe that she’s Scum using the book and magically knowing that it would cause an apparent Pro-Town result. So for the moment, she goes on my Tentative Town list.

Mahaloth doesn’t ping me at all. I haven’t played with him before, so I don’t have any prior experience of his behavior to judge by. His claim seems fine to me, and I have no reason to distrust it. So, again for the moment, he also goes on my Tentative Town list.

Suburban Plankton, on the other hand, does strike me as plausible Scum. If you read the build up to Peeker’s lynch, it seems to me that he and Astral are playing both ends against the middle, making sure that Scum has a foot in on both sides. That’s something I’d think was a good idea if I was Scum - make sure that on any given point, you had at least one player on each side so that if they were outed, it wouldn’t reveal anything about “Scum behavior.” And I agree with Stanislaus that Plankton has done a lot of pot-stirring, which is in essence trying to keep a foot on either side by yourself.

So, for now, I’m going to vote Suburban Plankton. I find the cases against him more compelling than his defense of himself. Sorry I don’t have more to add.

I don’t disagree - but have you also noticed that all the players in bold are players drawing attention to themselves?
What do you think of the lurkers and the people not posting so much (<-- rhetorical, not really expecting you to name all in the game ).
But it’s easy for us to focus on people talking and forgetting those that don’t.
Easy and dangerous…

[Drain_Bead]

@Tom_Scud

A quick note on McGinty: she did take a very small amount of heat earlier from Drain, here and here; still, the morning’s reaction seems pretty far over the top.

Yeah, but then I said that she went up bigtime on my town cred list after the peeker lynch, so any heat caused by that should have been negated by now.

[NAF1138]

@Mrs_McGinty

Yeah, I am.

Between the Ras lynch over at the org, and some bad stuff at CFC, I’m seriously fed up with people playing the man instead of the ball. Here, it started on day one with the Roman thing, and I don’t see it changing until I’m dead. When people are happy to buy the most convoluted crap in the name of branding me scummy, there’s really nothing more I can do.

I still don’t see how this is the case, and note that I am not voting for you, simply trying to understand your thought process.

How is the Romanic lynch playing the man and not the ball. If anything your defense of Romanic in that situation is playing the man not the ball. The ball in this case, if you are wondering, is Romanic seemingly knowing how many scum were in the game. That’s a totally legitimate slip. You said that Romanic isn’t the type of person to make that kind of slip…that’s playing the man not the ball. Choosing to ignore a slip because of something you know about a player personally is so far away from playing the ball that I am surprised you even brought them up in the same post.

Secondly, I have been doing a re-read of your posts and the posts surrounding them, and I still fail to see the vendetta against you that you are claiming. Please, post what I am missing. If you are right there is probably scum in that group, if you are wrong maybe it’s possible to clear everyone involved.

Not trying is suicide by lynch, because I promise you, there is no way you will not be lynched if you keep playing this way. If you are town that’s a bad call because we are on the same team and this is a team game. If you are scum…well frankly do whatever you want if you are scum. But if you are scum and this is some sort of ploy to gain sympathy let me be the 500th to tell you that shit wont fly over here.

[Normal_Phase]

@Mrs_McGinty

Yeah, I am.

Between the Ras lynch over at the org, and some bad stuff at CFC, I’m seriously fed up with people playing the man instead of the ball. Here, it started on day one with the Roman thing, and I don’t see it changing until I’m dead. When people are happy to buy the most convoluted crap in the name of branding me scummy, there’s really nothing more I can do.

OK.

I read you as honestly frustrated, for what it’s worth, and I do see the root of it – you were the first and for a while the only person to suspect peeker, and you were right. The scummiest person in the room is trying to make it a plausible bussing (which it is, as far as that goes, but since when is that a reason for suspecting someone?), and people are actually listening to him. It does suck on some level, if you are town, and currently I think you are. Perversely, I think you would be less frustrated if you were mafia.

[Suburban_Plankton]

@Nanook_of_the_North_Shore

SP, this idea that Town just kinda wanders along and never thinks about anything, or that Scum micromanage every single post down to the placement of commas is flawed. Peeker for instance shows that. If scum made sure of every single thing they posted, then he never would have made the initial mistake he did. And speaking for myself only, I know that as Town I always know exactly what I’m saying and why. Why wouldn’t you? I expect to be held accountable for the things I say, and one of the keys to being held accountable is being able to explain why you said it. Not only do I expect it, I want it. That accountablity is one of the strongest tools Town has. Why would I want to deny that?

That defense, along with the original case, plus the lack/weakness of the defense to said case, leave me voting you.

Nanook, I think you’re taking some liberties with what I actually said, which was this:

@Suburban_Plankton

The thing is, I haven’t really bothered thinking all that much about how I am going to defend myself, because I haven’t done anything wrong. When you’re playing Scum, you know you have to lie, almost constantly. So you need to prepare a defense before you even post anything. You already know all of the holes in every argument, so you try to prepare all of the answers to all of the questions in advance. You need to review every word to make sure you aren’t claiming to know something you don’t know; you need to make sure that all of your argumenst have a solid basis; you need to make sure you don’t say anything that contradicts anything you’ve said before.

As Town, you don’t do these things. You know you’re telling the truth, so you assume that others will know it as well. You don’t worry so much about the exact words that you use, because you don’t have a script that you need to stick to. You are free to say what you want to say, because you aren’t trying to hide anything.

Now obviously, I don’t expect that everyone is going to believe everything I say “just because I’m town”. I know it doesn’t work that way; I still need to support my conclusions with some kind of reasonable analysis. My point is that Town often have trouble giving iron-clad reasons for their arguments, because they don’t need to craft the arguments ahead of time to fit the conclusions that they are required to make up.

Where did I give the idea that Town “just kinda wanders along”, or that I don’t “always know exactly what I’m saying and why”? Where did I say that I don’t expect to be held accountable? What I said was that I don’t have the answers to all of the questions in advance, because I don’t spend extra time cross-examining my own posts ahead of time. That’s not the same as not having answers and explanations at all.

I know what I said, and I said what I meant. And when called on it, I have given my reasons for each and every one of my actions. Now, you may not like my reasons, but please don’t come out and say that I haven’t given a defense. If there is a question that you have about my actions that I haven’t already answered, ask it now. I’d be more than happy to answer it, because I have nothing to hide.

[Suburban_Plankton]

@Total_Lost

This is something I was wondering about as well. And I really read it as an “non-denial denial”.
Coming out defending what you didn’t do but in a way that would leave you open to saying “but I might have done it - just didn’t do it based on what you’d think was my motivations”.

What exactly did you read as a “non-denial denial”?

I’m not sure I even understand the second sentence. It’s obvious that I did what I did, and I said what I said. The only defense it is possible for me to have is “yes, I said that, but it didn’t mean what you think it meant”. We can’t argue the facts of what was posted, so the only thing to argue is motivations.

Or am I completely misinterpreting what you’re trying to say?

[Total_Lost]

@Suburban_Plankton

What exactly did you read as a “non-denial denial”?

I’m not sure I even understand the second sentence. It’s obvious that I did what I did, and I said what I said. The only defense it is possible for me to have is “yes, I said that, but it didn’t mean what you think it meant”. We can’t argue the facts of what was posted, so the only thing to argue is motivations.

Or am I completely misinterpreting what you’re trying to say?

Non-denial denial is a term used to describe an apparent denial that, though it appeared clearcut and unambiguous when heard, on examination turns out to be ambiguous and not a denial at all. The phrase is particularly associated with politics and means in effect “something made to sound like a denial without actually being one.”
The phrase was popularized during the Watergate era by Woodward and Bernstein in their book All the President’s Men, in reference to evasive statements by then-Attorney-General John Mitchell.

http://www.fact-index.com/n/no/non_denial_denial.html

[Suburban_Plankton]

@Total_Lost

Non-denial denial is a term used to describe an apparent denial that, though it appeared clearcut and unambiguous when heard, on examination turns out to be ambiguous and not a denial at all. The phrase is particularly associated with politics and means in effect “something made to sound like a denial without actually being one.”
The phrase was popularized during the Watergate era by Woodward and Bernstein in their book All the President’s Men, in reference to evasive statements by then-Attorney-General John Mitchell.

http://www.fact-index.com/n/no/non_denial_denial.html

I understand what you mean by 'non-denial denial. My question was this: What was it I said that you believe fits that definition?

[Oy]

@Total_Lost

I don’t disagree - but have you also noticed that all the players in bold are players drawing attention to themselves?
What do you think of the lurkers and the people not posting so much (<-- rhetorical, not really expecting you to name all in the game ).
But it’s easy for us to focus on people talking and forgetting those that don’t.
Easy and dangerous…

Believe it or not, I have thought of them, those silent ones…(doesn’t that sound eerie? :eek:)

I’m sure there’s a Scum or two hanging out in amongst them. I just don’t have a clue how to set about rooting them out.

Nanook is the lowest total-post player still alive (not counting Tom Scud, for obvious reasons). He is always a low-volume, high content poster. Everything he says always sounds measured and reasoned to me. That’s a very difficult play style to maintain, and I just don’t have the experience to judge accurately through it.

TexCat is next lowest, with only twenty-four posts thus far. I’ve never met her before, so I have no feel whatsoever for her. She voted for Romanic, but as I said before (Special Ed notwithstanding), the case on Romanic was so blatant and yet so silly that I truly dismiss the whole matter as pretty much null tells. She voted for Oredigger, saying he looked scummy. Well, I didn’t, but most other people did. The fact that she didn’t support it is not terribly telling, as she voted after a number of people had started piling on, so she may not have been able to find additional reasons. Or she might have been a member of the Scum trying to be inconspicuous. She made several posts about the Book, and ended up voting for NAF, which I totally understand since I was voting for him myself at that point. She didn’t think peeker was Scum, which, again, I get, since I didn’t think he was either. Since then, she questioned Drain’s and Mahaloth’s claims and asked about the missing Night. If she’s Scum, she’s being pretty innocuous. Definitely a possibility, but no ping to speak of.

Next up is Hal Briston at 35 total posts, and given that quite a few of his posts are joking, he probably has fewer actual content posts than TexCat. I don’t have a good feel for whether or not his low volume is typical of his play style; the only game I ever saw him in before this was Evil Dead 1. I will say that Hal is not a shy poster in general, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t a bit nervous posting in Mafia. Hal’s posting has been very non-commital; he makes comments about strategy and game theory rather than trying to come up with cases. Again, I can understand that, because I feel the same way, but it’s probably a bit of a scum indicator. (I, of course, am not Scum, but anyone else is fair game.:D)

Natlaw (37 total posts) tends to be another low-volume, high content poster. He too talks more about game theory than making cases, but I think he has a bit higher level of commitment and self-revelation than Hal. He’s been bang on Suburban for some time now. If you put me on the rack, I’d say Town rather than Scum, but I sure wouldn’t like to put money on it.

Brewha (49 total posts) has posted more than the others, most of it on theory or generalities. Brewha strikes me as Scummy, but that’s because he was Scum in Evil Dead 1. Stanislaus strikes me as Town for the same reason (that is, he was Town in Evil Dead 1).

And so forth. Total, I have no idea how to look at the lower volume posters, and that’s a fact. In fact, I’m not very good at looking at the high volume posters, but at least there’s something there to hitch your wagon to.

I will say that I think there will have been several Scum among, say, the first ten votes on Oredigger, a case which I thought was just all kinds of jumping on a bandwagon for want of a better vote. And maybe tomorrow morning (real time), I’ll go back and review them all.

On preview: Scum have no reason to make non-denial denials. They won’t be brought up on perjury charges if they lie.

[Suburban_Plankton]

@Normal_Phase

OK.

I read you as honestly frustrated, for what it’s worth, and I do see the root of it – you were the first and for a while the only person to suspect peeker, and you were right. The scummiest person in the room is trying to make it a plausible bussing (which it is, as far as that goes, but since when is that a reason for suspecting someone?), and people are actually listening to him. It does suck on some level, if you are town, and currently I think you are. Perversely, I think you would be less frustrated if you were mafia.

The bussing is not the reason I suspect Mrs McGinty. I have never claimed it was.

I was initially suspicious of Mrs McGinty because of his reaction to the Romanic situation. I’ve pointed out on more than one occasion that I think he hasn’t posted much content. His recent behavior is similar to the reactions of Telcontar, and to a lesser extent peeker, earlier in this game. These are the **reasons **for my suspicions.

The bussing explains some of McGinty’s behavior earlier in the game, but it is not the **reason **for my vote.

Actually, to come right down to it, the reason for my vote was this:

@Mrs_McGinty

I’m well aware that I’m not confirmed town. But once again the supposed ‘case’ against me is utter crap, and I’m getting sick of pointing that out. I’d actually prefer it if people would cast their votes against me, rather than just smudging me with the same tired nonsense. At least that would show a bit of stomach for the job at hand.

When people make statements like that, I’m inclined to play along with them. And since I had already made a case (though admittedly not the strongest one), I decided I’d take the next step and make a vote.

I’ve been spending some time today trying to make a better case against someone else, but frankly, I’ve been unable to do so. Until I do, or until something comes up that convinces me I’m wrong about McGinty, I’ll leave my vote where it is.

[ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies]

I backed off from it around the time that Normal laid out her case, but Suburban Plankton’s posts regarding Oy! back on page 38:

@Suburban_Plankton

I’m trying to gain insight into Oy’s thought process, and possible to confirm Drain Bead as Town.

I think that Oy giving the flower to Drain on Night 1 was not a smart move. Even if it is proven that Drain is Town, I still think it was not a smart move, given the information that was available at the time. I don’t think that there was sufficient evidence pointing to Drain being Town to warrant her being given the flower on Night 1.

Oy apparently thought there was more evidence than I did. I’d like to know her reasoning behind that. If it’s sound, then it moves Drain into the ‘Confirmed Town’ pool for me. If it’s unsound, then I continue to think that Oy made a ‘bad play’, but otherwise it’s a null tell.

@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies

What this boils down to, from my perspective, is that you’re willing to be sweet-talked into believing that someone is town, which is a load of bull horse pucky as far as an actual and whole Confirmed Town pool is concerned. You do not get confirmed players that way.

@Suburban_Plankton

No, it doesn’t boil down to that at all. I have no idea how you came to that conclusion from what I have posted. Can you please elaborate?

@Cookies quoting Suburban

I’d like to know her reasoning behind that. If it’s sound, then it moves Drain into the ‘Confirmed Town’ pool for me.

@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies

Oy! is not confirmed. Oy’s ability to produce sound reasoning would not confirm Oy, nor would it confirm anyone else. Yet you appear willing to take reasoning from an unconfirmed person and use it as evidence that another player is confirmed.

@Suburban_Plankton

Oy’s alignment never entered the picture. I was asking if there was evidence to support the claim “Drain Bead is Town”. That evidence, if it existed, could have come from townie Oy, or Scum Oy, or Third Party Cookies, or anyone else. ** If** the evidence existed, and **if **it was sound evidence, **then **it would support the conclusion that “Drain Bead is Town” and move her into the ‘Confirmed Pool’ (bearing in mind that nobody *really *gets confirmed until they turn up dead).

And bear in mind that I was pretty certain that no such evidence was forthcoming when I asked the question. I think I made my position on the subject pretty clear. If someone had provided the evidence I was asking about, I would have been very surprised.
And before anyone goes down that road, I’m not suggesting that Cookies is actually a Third Party player. It was an example to make a point. I really, really hope it wasn’t necessary for me to make this disclaimer.

Oy!'s alignment and Drain’s alignment had nothing to do with why this originally caught my eye, but their unconfirmed status had everything to do with it. I think it may display some PIS on Suburban Plankton’s part, though even if Suburban does flip as scum, that would just be a data point on the road to potentially confirming Oy! and/or Drain, not clear evidence that they are indeed confirmed.

Suburban Plankton

As for Mrs McGinty, I don’t think we’ve played much together, so it is difficult to judge an overreaction. I will say that it looks like a distraction from here, but it remains to be seen if that distraction is manipulative in nature or just unfortunate.

[Nanook_of_the_North_Shore]

@Normal_Phase

The scummiest person in the room is trying to make it a plausible bussing (which it is, as far as that goes, but since when is that a reason for suspecting someone?), and people are actually listening to him.

No, before today no one was listening to him. And I don’t see a single person, other than SP, mentioning it as a reason for suspecting someone. There have been people mentioning that bussing exists, and that just because you were first doesn’t mean you aren’t scum. Neither of those things are suspicions in and of themselves, and they do not justify the over the top, I’m taking my ball and going home reaction that McGinty has had since then.

[NAF1138]

I just want to go on record saying that I don’t care for the case against Plankton. I don’t have a good reason for not liking it, but something about it feels wrong to me.

Right now I am going to vote for Total Lost.

vote Total Lost

For similar reasons actually.

That is, I don’t have a good reason but something about her posting feels off. Yeah, yeah, how do you defend against that? You don’t, and it sucks. Sorry TL, but I got to go with who I think is scummy.

[Mrs_McGinty]

@Nanook_of_the_North_Shore

Neither of those things are suspicions in and of themselves, and they do not justify the over the top, I’m taking my ball and going home reaction that McGinty has had since then.

That’s fair. I’m sorry for the overreaction.

[special_ed]

@Nanook_of_the_North_Shore

While I’m here, one other thing. I think we can move Drain into the 90% confirmed pile. Mass blocks, or in this case basically skipping a Night entirely, is ALWAYS pro-Town. Sure, there are pro-town things that might not have happened, but the block itself is still pro-town. I see no reason to doubt a mass block happened, and I find that Drains story matches with it better than the vague possibility that maybe a spell occurred. I understand that listing her as vanilla in the PM when she really isn’t is weird, but I think that’s a discussion for after the game ends rather than now. 90% of course is not 100%, but that’s mostly because the only way to get to 100% is via death. It would take something extraordinary to get me to vote for her.

An odd thought occurred to me. What if shes actually 3rd party but somehow got a pro-Town power?

Seems unlikely, but I’ll not rule it out.

That or She has the book and somehow figured out how to use that spell? It would more than likely make her Town or Scum trying really hard for Town cred.

[special_ed]

Still catching up…

@Mrs_McGinty

Yeah, I am.

Between the Ras lynch over at the org, and some bad stuff at CFC, I’m seriously fed up with people playing the man instead of the ball. Here, it started on day one with the Roman thing, and I don’t see it changing until I’m dead. When people are happy to buy the most convoluted crap in the name of branding me scummy, there’s really nothing more I can do.

OK, by this point, you have Subruban, the lynch leader voting for you.

and now Brewha for ‘giving up’ which is exactly what we just saw a Scummy peeker do.

It seemed to me that you got most upset when you were denied access to a ‘scum wouldn’t do that defense’ despite the fact that it was abundantly clear that you didn’t really need a defense other than ‘the case against me sucks’ which is a valid defense.

I, for one, continue to find you no more suspicious than anyone else.

[TexCat]

Another daY when I have no clue who to vote for. Although it has generally been proven that the oddities I found in Mahaloth’s PM could be explained away, I’m still watching him. I am also watching Drain. I still find the timing of her unprovoked claim suspicious. And it looks like her spell might have cancelled the night, but I have to agree that if a scum or 3rd party figured out a way with book or otherwise how to cancel the night, they certainly would have tried to gain town cred with it. I find MrsMc a little over the top. I mostly ignored her feud with peeker (as observed my lack of vote on peeker who I’ve never figured out), but find her posts today protesting her innocence a little too much. I need to relook at Suburban. Nanook and Hal Briston stand out to me as lurkers, though I realize I could be in that category also. Nevertheless, we should not take our eyes off them.

We’ve a long daY today, and I am hoping that things might become clearer as the day goes on.

[special_ed]

@brewha

everyone I have had a strong suspicion of (except for NAF(which I really don’t anymore)) is dead.

@TexCat

Another daY when I have no clue who to vote for.

If I had a nickel for every time I’ve heard a Scum say this, I’d have somewhere between 5 and 25 cents.

Also, TexCat, why did you capitalize Day like daY, not once, but twice in your post?

[TexCat]

@special_ed

If I had a nickel for every time I’ve heard a Scum say this, I’d have somewhere between 5 and 25 cents.

Also, TexCat, why did you capitalize Day like daY, not once, but twice in your post?

Hehe. Somewhere between a nickel and a quarter? Not going to get rich that way, are you?

I thought it was customary to capitalize daY or nighT, when you meant game days and not real life days.