# Glasnost Mafia **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [February 17, 2011, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757 "2011-02-17T23:58:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 44
**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:** [March 6, 2011, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/861 "2011-03-06T05:44:19Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > I don’t think you even read the post you quoted. Zeriel said nothing about being sure that Mental was town. He said that someone needed to break the tie because ties are inherently anti-town in this game. Further, he lists Pleo and Astral as suspicious because they _created_ the tie. That case is nothing but slander and that’s good enough for a vote in my book. > > [color] **Vote SubPlank** [/color] He said “someone NEEDS to switch off MentalGuy” (capitalization his). Not simply that “someone NEEDS to break the tie” but that someone must specifically unvote **MentalGuy**. Now on the one hand that’s not such a big deal, because \*\*Zeriel \*\*was voting for \*\*Pleo \*\*at the time, so he obviously wasn’t going to ask someone to switch off of **Pleo** …but considering the way \*\*MentalGuy \*\*was playing at the time, I thought the capital ‘NEEDS’ was a bit overboard. It suggested to me that he was quite a bit more certain of \*\*MentalGuy’s \*\*innocence that I was. And then just a few sentences later, he tells us he will vote for \*\*MentalGuy \*\*if necessary to break the tie. So someone NEEDS to switch \*off \* **MentalGuy** , but if nobody does, \*\*Zerial \*\*will switch \*to \ ***MentalGuy**? That just doesn’t compute, especially since \*\*Zerial \*\*switching his vote to \*\*Astral \*\*(a player who he actually finds Scummy) will break the tie just as well. As far as the case being slander…first of all, it’s hardly a “case”; it’s simply something I found worthy of comment, but not enough to vote on. And second, in this case it would be libel, not slander 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/862 "2011-03-06T05:55:41Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > It could be that \*\*septimus \*\*just “doesn’t get it” even after it was explained in great detail. But if he thinks that \*\*\*\*Pleonast \*\*\*\*shouldn’t be lynched, and thinks \*\*Astral \*\*should, then how can he not see \*\*MentalGuy’s \*\*vote as Scummy? 😕 If someone doesn’t follow my lead on the Lynch vote, that doesn’t make them scummy! (If it did, I’d think you all Scum with me the only Townie in the game. 😃 ) As for my failure to join the bandwagon against **MentalGuy** , I shouldn’t say “I told you so!” (since even a stopped clock may be right twice a day) but, unless you still think **Mental** is a Scum faking to be Cop, it sure seems to me I should be complimented, not condemned for my assessment of **MentalGuy** ’s post. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/863 "2011-03-06T06:05:19Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > 😕 If someone doesn’t follow my lead on the Lynch vote, that doesn’t make them scummy! (If it did, I’d think you all Scum with me the only Townie in the game. 😃 ) > > As for my failure to join the bandwagon against **MentalGuy** , I shouldn’t say “I told you so!” (since even a stopped clock may be right twice a day) but, unless you still think **Mental** is a Scum faking to be Cop, it sure seems to me I should be complimented, not condemned for my assessment of **MentalGuy** ’s post. Sure I’ll compliment you, conditionally, but I’m not going to give you credibility. The Scum know who is or isn’t scum and can use that information to make some really compelling and seemingly-authentically-persuasive insights about people that they already know are pure of heart. So kudos to you..if you happen to be a Townie player who was able to titrate the right concentration of benefit of the doubt. If you’re a scum playing a shell game with your perfect information, I’m not going to give you any cookies. ---
**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:** [March 6, 2011, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/864 "2011-03-06T06:07:48Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > 😕 If someone doesn’t follow my lead on the Lynch vote, that doesn’t make them scummy! (If it did, I’d think you all Scum with me the only Townie in the game. 😃 ) > > As for my failure to join the bandwagon against **MentalGuy** , I shouldn’t say “I told you so!” (since even a stopped clock may be right twice a day) but, unless you still think **Mental** is a Scum faking to be Cop, it sure seems to me I should be complimented, not condemned for my assessment of **MentalGuy** ’s post. I consider \*\*MentalGuy \*\*to be as confirmed as can be at this point. But when you made that post on Day 1, \*\*MentalGuy \*\*was looking like anything but a Town Cop. You may have ultimately been correct to trust him, but we only know that now through the benefit of hindsight. And of course, if you are Scum, then it was no trick at all to divine that \*\*MentalGuy \*\*was Town. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/865 "2011-03-06T06:07:56Z")
I’m not _necessarily_ going to give you credibility. Everything should be examined conditionally. Each game is a unique snow flake, etc etc ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/866 "2011-03-06T06:49:29Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > He said “someone NEEDS to switch off MentalGuy” (capitalization his). Not simply that “someone NEEDS to break the tie” but that someone must specifically unvote **MentalGuy**. Now on the one hand that’s not such a big deal, because \*\*Zeriel \*\*was voting for \*\*Pleo \*\*at the time, so he obviously wasn’t going to ask someone to switch off of **Pleo** …but considering the way \*\*MentalGuy \*\*was playing at the time, I thought the capital ‘NEEDS’ was a bit overboard. It suggested to me that he was quite a bit more certain of \*\*MentalGuy’s \*\*innocence that I was. > > And then just a few sentences later, he tells us he will vote for \*\*MentalGuy \*\*if necessary to break the tie. So someone NEEDS to switch \*off \* **MentalGuy** , but if nobody does, \*\*Zerial \*\*will switch \*to \ ***MentalGuy**? That just doesn’t compute, especially since \*\*Zerial \*\*switching his vote to \*\*Astral \*\*(a player who he actually finds Scummy) will break the tie just as well. > > As far as the case being slander…first of all, it’s hardly a “case”; it’s simply something I found worthy of comment, but not enough to vote on. And second, in this case it would be libel, not slander 🙂 Yes, someone NEEDED to switch off MentalGuy, because Pleo was the most obviously scummy person on Day One–I do not go halfway when I make a scum accusation, and I will cajole and bitch until I get my way. At the same time–the voting record MUST be kept useful, which in this game means preventing ties. The ONLY surefire tie-prevention mechanic I had at my personal disposal was switching to MentalGuy at the last second–that way, the relative will of town was preserved and it would have taken TWO last-minute scum votes (instead of merely one) to re-tie it.. Fortunately it didn’t come to that. ---
**Author:** ![One\_And\_Only\_Wanderers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/838e76/32.png) [@One\_And\_Only\_Wanderers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/One_And_Only_Wanderers)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 9:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/867 "2011-03-06T09:14:52Z")
going to be low content the next few days. Flying to Finland for a week for work tomorrow. I believe my hotel has free internet so I should be able to get some involvement. ---
**Author:** ![fubbleskag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fubbleskag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fubbleskag)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/868 "2011-03-06T14:49:40Z")
I’ve never played this Mafia thing - can someone point me towards the general rules/etc? I’m intrigued. ---
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/869 "2011-03-06T15:32:34Z")
> [@fubbleskag](#): > > I’ve never played this Mafia thing - can someone point me towards the general rules/etc? I’m intrigued. [Mafia on Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mafia_%28party_game%29) [Flash introduction](http://www.sitesled.com/members/mikeburnfire/mafiascum04.swf) [Wiki including information about games played on the SDMB](http://wiki.flyingcowofdoom.com/mafiaWiki/Main_Page) Note that you’re posting in a live game tread, if you have more questions ask them in [the forbidden (for players of this current game) thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=598096). ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/870 "2011-03-06T16:12:55Z")
> [@Natlaw](#): > > Note that you’re posting in a live game tread, … I can’t fully decode this Freudian slip, but it sure seems like some sort of scum-tell. **Vote Natlaw** ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/871 "2011-03-06T18:31:27Z")
> [@Manwich](#): > > - I still don’t understand the whole “there is no reason” attitude. There are reasons to vote for a lot of players, including me. Even some of things you have said or done that aren’t suspicious to me could be another players reasons for voting. I actually see your point here. I know there is no reason to vote me and by that, I mean that I have not made any anti-Town or pro-Scum moves that I see, but I can’t expect you all to see that since you don’t know for sure I’m Town. Anyway, fair point. ---
**Author:** ![Astral\_Rejection](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@Astral\_Rejection](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astral_Rejection)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/872 "2011-03-06T18:45:01Z")
A couple of corrections: > [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > - He subtly accused **Zeriel** of PIS Nothing subtle about it. I came out and directly asked Zeriel. > [@](#): > > - His only comment about **Pleo** all Day was in #266: “I’m not particularly feeling the Pleo case and it doesn’t need my help even if I did.” What else did you want me to say beyond that I wasn’t feeling it? I still believe the case on Pleonast wasn’t inherently good, and we lucked out by lynching him. I certainly didn’t have any defense for him, I just wanted to acknowledge the case on him while looking elsewhere. > [@](#): > > - The smudge(s) on me This seems to happen a lot. It’s not a smudge if I directly come out and say you’re the second-scummiest person I’ve seen. It’s a direct accusation and notice for the rest of the players. Calling it a “smudge” is all kinds of disingenuous, because you’re trying to imply I was being sneaky or trying to be tricksy. > [@](#): > > - Given his repeated suspicions of me and his comment on **Sachertorte** , I don’t see how he could end the Day without any sort of a vote. He ended the Day with this: I didn’t feel comfortable deciding on either of you when I didn’t have the time to do a thorough case building exercise. I announced my suspicions of both of you, but you’re failing to notice the timing. I was at work, trying to post in the spare minutes I had here and there, and couldn’t really commit to a decision. If your argument is that I’m trying to “hide” my voting record by not voting, just pretend I voted for both of you at the time and move on. > [@](#): > > - A commentless “me too” vote on **Gadarene** without apparently checking **Septimus** ’ case :He’d unvoted in #384. … huh? I still think Gadarene is scummy. However, that eloquent post about Septimus reminded me how scummy he was feeling, too. So in my head, I weighed my two options, and decided to revote. They could both be scum, for all I know. Or neither. For the record, I still think you’re feeling scummy, but I prefer my vote on Septimus right now. Now, fundamentally, your issue is with the fact that I voted _with_ Septimus, and now I’m voting _for_ Septimus, right? Again, _I don’t actually know which one is scum._ This game would be a lot easier if I did. Septimus made a convincing post about someone I was leaning scum on, so I put an early vote in. However, an even better case against Septimus (whom I also lean scum on) was built, so I moved on over. In Septimus’ case, I weighed how I felt about him with the case he was building, and decided to tentatively vote with him. Remember, _I could be wrong and he could be town,_ so I should at least consider his words. I’ve been trying not to approach every single post as if they were scummy like I did last game. ---
**Author:** ![Astral\_Rejection](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@Astral\_Rejection](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astral_Rejection)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/873 "2011-03-06T18:46:44Z")
I meant to add, I have no other issues with your WoW or discussion of me. Of course, now that I’ve said that, someone’s gonna point out an error I should have noticed. 😃 ---
**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:** [March 6, 2011, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/874 "2011-03-06T19:29:42Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > He said “someone NEEDS to switch off MentalGuy” (capitalization his). Not simply that “someone NEEDS to break the tie” but that someone must specifically unvote **MentalGuy**. Now on the one hand that’s not such a big deal, because \*\*Zeriel \*\*was voting for \*\*Pleo \*\*at the time, so he obviously wasn’t going to ask someone to switch off of **Pleo** …but considering the way \*\*MentalGuy \*\*was playing at the time, I thought the capital ‘NEEDS’ was a bit overboard. It suggested to me that he was quite a bit more certain of \*\*MentalGuy’s \*\*innocence that I was. > > And then just a few sentences later, he tells us he will vote for \*\*MentalGuy \*\*if necessary to break the tie. So someone NEEDS to switch \*off \* **MentalGuy** , but if nobody does, \*\*Zerial \*\*will switch \*to \ ***MentalGuy**? That just doesn’t compute, especially since \*\*Zerial \*\*switching his vote to \*\*Astral \*\*(a player who he actually finds Scummy) will break the tie just as well. > > As far as the case being slander…first of all, it’s hardly a “case”; it’s simply something I found worthy of comment, but not enough to vote on. And second, in this case it would be libel, not slander 🙂 Sure. But I like being OVERLY DRAMATIC in my playstyle (which usually gets me killed). But…I still think your case is weak, but I can see how you would get there from here. **Unvote SubPlank** **Vote Mahaloth** For being eager to clamp down on discussion, spurious justifications of his votes, a “have I mentioned I am TOWNIE today” comment N2, and just sounding kind of shifty. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/875 "2011-03-06T19:35:32Z")
@ Astral : I’m not sure why you find me scummy. You wrote: > [@](#): > > … But then he shoehorns in ANOTHER reminder that we shouldn’t be voting for Pleo, because it’s better to keep a claimed vanilla alive, for whatever reason. He keeps mentioning tactical reasons, but I can’t think of any outside of letting scum win. In #849 I provided a detailed look at why I feel an immediate Lynch of anyone claiming Vanilla Town may be a tactical error, given the sleeper recruitment mechanics. ---
**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:** [March 6, 2011, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/876 "2011-03-06T19:36:58Z")
Also, if anyone is interested, I need a player to sub in on my game over at the Giraffe board. Complicated, but fun! ---
**Author:** ![Astral\_Rejection](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@Astral\_Rejection](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astral_Rejection)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/877 "2011-03-06T19:47:02Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > @ Astral : I’m not sure why you find me scummy. You wrote: > > In #849 I provided a detailed look at why I feel an immediate Lynch of anyone claiming Vanilla Town may be a tactical error, given the sleeper recruitment mechanics. Your explanation comes several posts AFTER the post you of mine you just quoted. How could I have possibly included your explanation in my evaluation of you, given that fact? But, perhaps you’re asking me to reconsider my vote now that I can consider your explanation. Okay, here goes: your idea won’t work, and isn’t worth trying. And you really should have considered this when you proposed your idea. Problems include, but are not limited to: 1. If we’re just going to lynch him anyway the next day, scum will not target him for recruitment. 2. If we’re just going to lynch him the next day, we’re increasing our chances of hitting town powers by switching at the last moment. Granted, we also increase our chances of hitting scum. 3. Theoretically, we will _never lynch anyone_ if we follow your plan. Everyone will claim SOMETHING, obviously. 4. Scum will claim vanilla town, because they don’t dare claim anything else. If we suspect Pleo is SCUM, why wait? 5. Lynching a claimed vanilla town is still our optimal strategy (you know, short of lynching scum). We too could be lynching the sleepers without realizing it, which is fantastic from our point of view. What’s more, we’re shrinking the unknown pool and not hurting our own powers. 6. Your plan asks us to ignore all of our evidence pointing towards someone scummy the second they claim vanilla town. That’s madness. ---
**Author:** ![Astral\_Rejection](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@Astral\_Rejection](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Astral_Rejection)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/878 "2011-03-06T19:51:56Z")
> [@Astral\_Rejection](#): > > But, perhaps you’re asking me to reconsider my vote now that I can consider your explanation. Okay, here goes: your idea won’t work, and isn’t worth trying. And you really should have considered this when you proposed your idea. Could I have used the word “consider” more? I submit that I could not. ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/879 "2011-03-06T20:15:28Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > There have been questions about this, so let me explain it. I’ll begin with the simplest possible scenario. (Admittedly, there are various gambits and WIFOM ploys by Scum that could invalidate this simplest scenario.) > > Each Night, Scum will presumably try to find a Sleeper. If they target a Vanilla Town they have 2 chances in 10 of succeeding. (2 in 9 now.) Otherwise their chance is 2 in 17 (2 in 14 now), or rather, to be precise, (2 - V/5) in 17, where V is the number of confirmed Vanilla Townies. In other words, if playing the odds they will choose a “confirmed” Vanilla as their recruitment target. > > I assumed that Pleo was either Vanilla Town as claimed or Scum. (Perhaps he’d also make the claim as Bomber, but let’s keep it simple.) Scum certainly knew whether he was Scum or not, so might have taken their 2-in-10 chance at recruitment. > > Hence the idea of waiting at least one Day. If Pleo was indeed Vanilla, he might report a recruitment attempt, which would tend to confirm(\*) him as Town after all. If no one, or someone else, reported recruitment, we could then Lynch (or Vig-kill) Pleo! By no means would this prove him to be Scum, but since a Day 1 Lynch of Pleo was already underway, to wait a Day, gain evidence increasing the likelihood of his scumminess, but still MisLynch isn’t particularly worse than the Day 1 MisLynch which would have been in progress. > > And, most importantly, it might be that Pleo was in fact the Sleeper! He claims as Vanilla Town because he thinks he is one, gets Scummified in the Night-time, Lynched Day 2 (or even a little later) in my scenario, and Town has gained a Doctor! > > (\*) True, Scum might waste their Night 1 recruitment just to semi-confirm a scummy Pleo as Town. Moreover, understanding the scenario I just described, they might be unlikely to attempt a recruitment of the claimed Vanilla. Indeed, for these reasons, it can be said I was hoping for Scum misplay. And that’s why I left the details of my reasoning vague. > > HTH. I disagree with this thinking. At the time, I didn’t press on septimus because I did see a valid reason to defer the lynch of Pleonast. It’s pretty much the same reason as the discussion regarding Drain Bead on Day Two. That is, the vigilante would target Pleonast during the night, freeing Town to lynch someone else. (side note: IMO, this was tactically incorrect for Day One because the lynch was not uncontested). Anyway, now I see that this was NOT what septimus was thinking. So I’m left to wonder about septimus’s posed ‘plan.’ I’m actually leaning Town on this whole exchange. I find it more plausible that a townie septimus thought of an (incorrect) idea and ran with it rather than a scummy septimus cooking up an incorrect idea to feed to town to try and get Pleonast not lynched. Doesn’t really make sense from a scum point of view. > [@special\_ed](#): > > @sachertorte, what are your thoughts on Astral now? As far as I can recall, my Day One case against Astral was regarding Astral’s pointing out Zeriel’s possible PIS. If I recall correctly, the nuance was that Astral didn’t explicitly call Zeriel out on it, but only alluded to it in the sense that Zeriel should not know what Astral’s alignment was. I still think it is a point against Astral, and Astral hasn’t done anything to make me think otherwise. As far as a Day Three case goes, I’m on the fence. While numerically we are on Day Three, the F’ed up lynch of Pleonast and investigation driven lynch of Drain Bead leaves little more for Day Three than on Day One (i.e., its like Day One all over again). So I’d rather have more to a case than that to vote for Astral, but given the circumstances of Day One and Day Two, maybe that bar is too high. I’m voting for Mahaloth, but I could see myself backing an Astral lynch as well. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2011, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757/880 "2011-03-06T20:18:53Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > For being eager to clamp down on discussion, spurious justifications of his votes, a “have I mentioned I am TOWNIE today” comment N2, and just sounding kind of shifty. 1. I never said “have I mentioned I’m a Townie today” or said anything like that. My fluff post at Night was just that…fluff. 2. Define “kind of sounding shifty” for the rest of us. 3. “spurious justificatino of his votes” - Which votes(plural, remember) - Which spurious justifications 1. I have not clamped down discussions. I’m one of the most active people in discussions. I wanted to hammer Drain because I felt discussions were running on with little useful chat. I stand by it. Please respond. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757.md?page=43) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/glasnost-mafia/571757.md?page=45)