# International Mafia **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 1, 2010, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553 "2010-12-01T16:47:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**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:** [December 10, 2010, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/201 "2010-12-10T21:01:19Z")
I don’t know that it’s a big deal, but I hate being misinterpreted, especially in Mafia… ShadowFacts, you wrapped up your last post with this summary: > [@ShadowFacts](#): > > Who “came out guns blazing to lynch all travelers?” As far as I can see, only two people have said anything remotely close to that - \*\*Suburban Plankton \*\* (a traveler) and **MentalGuy** , and those are not exactly guns blazing (see quotes above). Other people, myself included, have said that travel is not currently grounds for immediate suspicion, just something to pay attention to. So, yes, there has been a lot of discussion around traveling, as should be expected, but I’m not seeing a bias. I didn’t even come remotely close to coming out “guns blazing”. I said that anyone traveling was immune to lynching (at that time), so that “is one reason to be suspicious of a person who does a lot of traveling.” Saying that there exists a reason to be suspicious of someone who “does a lot of traveling” is not even in the same ballpark as saying “lynch all travelers”. I realize you qualified your statement, but you still associated my name with that idea, and I do not wish to have that association made. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/202 "2010-12-11T00:35:52Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > I don’t know that it’s a big deal, but I hate being misinterpreted, especially in Mafia… > > ShadowFacts, you wrapped up your last post with this summary: > I didn’t even come remotely close to coming out “guns blazing”. I said that anyone traveling was immune to lynching (at that time), so that “is one reason to be suspicious of a person who does a lot of traveling.” > > Saying that there exists a reason to be suspicious of someone who “does a lot of traveling” is not even in the same ballpark as saying “lynch all travelers”. I realize you qualified your statement, but you still associated my name with that idea, and I do not wish to have that association made. I agree with you and was not trying to make that association. I don’t think anyone has come out and said “lynch all travelers,” which was the point I was trying to make. ---
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/203 "2010-12-11T03:53:05Z")
> [@ShadowFacts](#): > > A lot of stuff Look, I’m going to put this as simple as I can. You said, in post 84: > [@](#): > > My first reaction upon seeing the sample role PMs that sach provided was that I would definitely start by voting for anyone traveling. Well, letsee. Who’s traveling right now? Oh, I know! Me. I start out the game by traveling, apparently. So pardon me if someone (and you were the first person to say anything along these lines) saying “I will vote for anyone traveling” will raise my hackles since I started out traveling against my will. So, automatically, I’m going to be/get defensive regarding you, in particular. You then go on to talk about the sample PMs and how vanilla couldn’t travel. Yes, you did say, later on in that same post, that it COULD not be the case. And me, I was telling you, in my first post to you, what the facts were. That yes, some vanilla’s CAN travel and that just because someone is a Dual Citizen doesn’t mean they can’t be vanilla too. So what am I missing here? :dubious: You seem awfully defensive here over a whole lot of nothing. And, for the record, I didn’t call anyone names. I said what you were doing seemed foolhardy. That’s not the same as calling you a fool. I’m talking about your actions/posts…not you yourself. ---
**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:** [December 11, 2010, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/204 "2010-12-11T06:11:26Z")
Thoughts on ShadowFacts: Post 84 - His first post strikes me as exceptionally fluffy - He says something to the effect of “I was gonna look for this, but it turns out I can’t! So I guess it’s back to the usual reasonless votes and speculation!” My problem with this is three-fold. First, it’s a meaningless post. Second, it seems to be screaming “Hey look how town I am!” Third, I did the exact same thing as scum in LOTR mafia. Post 130 - Like NAF, I don’t like his totally null comments on Baffle. But what troubles me more is his talk about Wolverine. > [@](#): > > Wolverine’s idea of issuing an arrest warrant today for someone in Wellington is a terrible idea. Could’ve been a townie terrible idea, though, so no vote from me right now. Something about the phrasing of this doesn’t sit right with me. I know it’s impossible to defend against me saying it feels off and somewhat scummy when it’s a relatively innocuous statement. I think it’s your added “Could’ve been a townie terrible idea, though.” I’m finding it difficult to elaborate on why this strikes me as scummy. It just screams “Look what a helpful and open-minded townie I am!” Does this sentence seem just a tiny bit scummy to anyone else? I might be reading too much into this. I"m still deciding if this is enough to vote for you. Totally unrelated note: with all the talk about claiming who can travel and who can’t, there’s something we need to remember: > [@](#): > > Win Conditions > The International Crime Ring (ICR) win if they manage to equal or out number Town players. > Town Players win when all ICR have been gaoled. > **A Stalemate is also a possible outcome.** A stalemate is also possible. If we reveal all of our travelers, a losing scum team could conceivably force a stalemate by killing our travelers, thus preventing us from switching sides to lynch them. That would suggest to me that we want to keep our travelers somewhat secret, against that possibility. ---
**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:** [December 11, 2010, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/205 "2010-12-11T06:12:48Z")
You know what, I’ll commit. I’ve been trying to play less stingily with my votes, so **vote ShadowFacts.** ---
**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:** [December 11, 2010, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/206 "2010-12-11T06:19:05Z")
For reference, my LOTR mafia post: > [@Lord of the Rings Mafia](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/419): > > On another note, I planned on keeping a very close eye on the people who predominantly discussed game mechanics on day one. Since that’s been the dominant topic for just about everybody, I guess I’ll need a new strategy 🙂 ShadowFacts similar post (I’ve snipped his explanation): > [@ShadowFacts](#): > > So it’s back to the usual Day One flailing about blindly/game mechanic speculation! ---
**Author:** ![Baffle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/dec6dc/32.png) [@Baffle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baffle)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 7:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/207 "2010-12-11T07:36:11Z")
> [@Astral\_Rejection](#): > > You know what, I’ll commit. I’ve been trying to play less stingily with my votes, This is a good point. Pleonast hasn’t redeemed himself in my eyes – and since I don’t know when the day is going to end, I want to get this out there in time. **vote Pleonast** ---
**Author:** ![Romanic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a6a055/32.png) [@Romanic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Romanic)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/208 "2010-12-11T12:22:15Z")
**vote Baffle** So far he’s my #1 scum because: > [@Baffle](#): > > I’m not entirely sure what the benefits to travel are at all. There are, however, twelve people currently in London; plus two on the plane. > > **sacher, have you provided fake PMs to anyone?** > [@Baffle](#): > > **Alright. Will you provide them to anyone who asks?** [Not bleaching sorry. I want it to be clear these were questions to the mod.] These 2 questions seems out of place, specially the 2nd one which doesn’t make sense after sacher’s answer to the first one. I’m getting a scum feeling here because this might be an attempt to look Town, as in a scum wouldn’t ask this type of stuff right? > [@Baffle](#): > > I find it very interesting that it’s the first hours of Day 1 and you’re already pushing for a mass claim. I don’t know what kind of roles there are in this game – but I am wondering if you may be looking for a specific person or particular citizenship as a target for your own power role. At the very least I find it suspicious, and would prefer to wait for a few days and have some more info before we try any kind of claim. The big problem for scums on day 1 is to find a vote that will not look suspicious, and attacking someone who’s talking about a mass claim is a good opportunity. Baffle also does not place a vote on Pleonast, which is in my eyes a plus toward him being scum. Uncertainty - maybe he’s testing the field to see how players will react, or maybe he’s giving himself a reason to vote for Pleonast later (and he just did, see the above post). > [@Baffle](#): > > [speculation] > > I see no reason to believe that all the scum can travel, either. It’s entirely possible that there are scum who are stuck in the same city all game. > > For that matter, we might have characters with a ‘deport’ power that can force someone to travel, even if they don’t want to, or don’t have the ability. > > [/speculation] > [@Baffle](#): > > **Also, I don’t think anyone has yet mentioned the possibility that there are scum who can’t travel.** Seeing as it’s the ‘international’ crime ring they could logically forge passports or some such, but that’s just based on colour and I don’t know to what extent the gameplay is based on the colour. > > Even if there are one non-travelling scum in each city, and assuming there are five scum which makes sense based on number of players, scum could amass four of theirs against ten of ours in Wellington, become the majority after a single day, and leave their one scum in London to NK claimed travellers until he gets lynched (unlikely if he’s one of twelve). Within a couple of days the game could be over. > > No travelling, and no claiming of travel abilities. Insisting again (like the 2 questions about fake PMs to sacher). Bold part in the last quote is what’s pinging my scum radar. He says this has yet to be mentioned but he already did it. Feels like a way to appear helpful by pushing the idea that some scum might not be able to travel. Feels like he’s trying too hard. This one is hard to put into words, might fall in the hunch category. And the vote on Pleonast is too suspicious. Pleo claimed being an Attache who will automatically travel at every opportunity, and Baffle never spoke about that. If someone claims, taking his claim into consideration is kinda mandatory when you vote for him, yet Baffle didn’t. In all his posts, he never brushed the subject. His argument, I believe, is only that Pleonast talked about mass claiming. Ignoring a claim when voting for someone is not something a Town player should do. You can consider the last point my main argument against Baffle. @Baffle: What do you think of Pleonast’s claim? You must have an opinion since you are voting for him. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/209 "2010-12-11T15:21:03Z")
> [@Idle\_Thoughts](#): > > So what am I missing here? :dubious: You seem awfully defensive here over a whole lot of nothing. > And, for the record, I didn’t call anyone names. I said what you were doing seemed foolhardy. That’s not the same as calling you a fool. I’m talking about your actions/posts…not you yourself. I think it’s really ironic that you are calling me defensive, since that is exactly how I think you’ve reacted to me from the get go. Let me sum up how I see that opening exchange: Me: At first I thought travelers were suspicious since I thought Vanilla cannot travel, but upon clarification from the mod it is clear that travelers are not suspicious. You: You’re wrong, travel is not suspicious because I am vanilla and can travel. Claim. 😕 I feel like I’ve then spent the rest of this game having to explain and re-explain and re-explain that same damn post, which you misinterpreted from the get go, when we actually agree about the issue. It’s a little surreal. Speaking of which: [QUOTE=Astral Rejection] Post 84 - His first post strikes me as exceptionally fluffy - He says something to the effect of “I was gonna look for this, but it turns out I can’t! So I guess it’s back to the usual reasonless votes and speculation!” My problem with this is three-fold. First, it’s a meaningless post. Second, it seems to be screaming “Hey look how town I am!” Third, I did the exact same thing as scum in LOTR mafia. [/QUOTE] I’m sorry, but this is total crap. That post is decidedly not fluff, it is a basic analysis of a game mechanic that comes to a solid conclusion: travel is a null tell. How is that fluff? It’s so weird - every time I try to explain my thought processes (i.e. “this is what I am thinking and this is how I came to that conclusion”), people accuse me of waffling, playing both sides, or posting fluff. re: Wolverine - see my response already to **NAF1138** earlier. ---
**Author:** ![Baffle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/dec6dc/32.png) [@Baffle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baffle)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/210 "2010-12-11T17:16:20Z")
> [@Romanic](#): > > And the vote on Pleonast is too suspicious. Pleo claimed being an Attache who will automatically travel at every opportunity, and Baffle never spoke about that. If someone claims, taking his claim into consideration is kinda mandatory when you vote for him, yet Baffle didn’t. In all his posts, he never brushed the subject. His argument, I believe, is only that Pleonast talked about mass claiming. Ignoring a claim when voting for someone is not something a Town player should do. > > You can consider the last point my main argument against Baffle. > > @Baffle: What do you think of Pleonast’s claim? You must have an opinion since you are voting for him. I wanted to clarify if scum were getting fake PMs. Since I don’t have an answer either way, my mod questions really didn’t help. But even if the mod’s not providing fakes, Pleonast could easily enough write his own. Especially since he wrote one that gives him a free pass for travelling. (Perhaps he’s a scum that is forced to travel.) In short, the existence of a claim is meaningless. My main argument against Pleonast is his elevation of minor scraps of contrary evidence to certainty, in the tone of his posts. Calling out a scum based on his tone is an ephemeral argument, but it’s the closest thing I can get to a good one on Day One. Yes, the mass claim argument was what first started my suspicion, but more has come behind it. ---
**Author:** ![Wolverine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ba9def/32.png) [@Wolverine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolverine)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/211 "2010-12-11T19:02:36Z")
I know that nobody wants my support (through self-inflicted stupidity), but \*\* vote Baffle\*\* _Besides the many reasons listed above_, in my offline experiences scum survive longer if in the early part of the game they are not seen as united or linked. If Baffle is scum, then fellow scum should either take up the opposite side of the argument or stay quiet. Baffle had almost no support (or at least no direct support that I could find) which I would not expect if he were town and Pleonast was scum. Pleonast had several supporters (NAF1138 #101 before Baffle’s attack post #107, Rin Twisted #109 directly after Baffle’s post, both of them later #142-144, and others) which weakens the idea that Pleonast is scum. Unless all 3 of them on Pleonast’s side are scum which to me is not the usual strategy. If both Baffle and Pleonast are town, then my line of reasoning is screwed. Scum could pick any side and screw the other. ---
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/212 "2010-12-11T19:05:02Z")
> [@ShadowFacts](#): > > Me: At first I thought travelers were suspicious since I thought Vanilla cannot travel, but upon clarification from the mod it is clear that travelers are not suspicious. > You: You’re wrong, travel is not suspicious because I am vanilla and can travel. Claim. Sorry, I see it more as: You: I’m going to start by voting for anyone traveling! [Your exact words] Me: [who’s traveling without having a choice] Hey, waitaminute, now that’s not fair… Easy peasy. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/213 "2010-12-11T19:41:30Z")
Limited time post: I think it’s mighty disingenuous that **ShadowFacts** is saying that nobody was coming out guns-a-blazing to lynch travelers, when his own post was the main one I was looking at when I made that statement. There were a lot of people who were expressing suspicion of travelers out of the gate in this game. Whether or not they actually would have followed it up with a vote was irrelevant in the overall point I was trying to make, which is that given the suspicion many people expressed regarding travel, I’d expect Scum (and really, pretty much everyone, actually) to lay low and not do it unless forced to by their role or outside forces. **vote ShadowFacts**. I see his actions here as trying to talk out both sides of his mouth. To honestly try to argue that nobody wanted to lynch travelers when one of his first posts in this game was expressing that his initial thoughts were to vote for travelers is quite squirrely. ---
**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:** [December 11, 2010, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/214 "2010-12-11T19:52:03Z")
> [@ShadowFacts](#): > > I’m sorry, but this is total crap. That post is decidedly not fluff, it is a basic analysis of a game mechanic that comes to a solid conclusion: travel is a null tell. How is that fluff? It’s so weird - every time I try to explain my thought processes (i.e. “this is what I am thinking and this is how I came to that conclusion”), people accuse me of waffling, playing both sides, or posting fluff. We’re gonna have to agree to disagree. I consider it fluff because the end result is nothing. Finishing your thoughts with “well I guess I have to make reasonless votes and crazy speculation” is not a well-reasoned argument. Plus, and I admit I’m playing from a gut feeling here, it’s nearly identical in tone and meaning to a post I made as scum in LOTR Mafia. My goal with that post was to seem like a helpful townie. > [@Wolverine](#): > > I know that nobody wants my support (through self-inflicted stupidity), but [snipped] The start of your post made me actually laugh out loud, something I rarely do when I’m sitting in front of my computer. 🙂 Second, your reasoning strikes me as perfectly sound, even if it might not be the case. I just wanted you to know that your vote makes sense to me. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/215 "2010-12-11T20:25:39Z")
> [@Idle\_Thoughts](#): > > Sorry, I see it more as: > > You: I’m going to start by voting for anyone traveling! [Your exact words] Wrong. That is the exact opposite of what I said. I can’t believe I have to post it again but here it is. Please read beyond the first sentence, and maybe you’ll get it this time. I’ll put some helpful colors in for you. > [@ShadowFacts](#): > > My first reaction upon seeing the sample role PMs that **sach** provided was that I would definitely start by voting for anyone traveling. Of the 3 roles, Vanilla could not travel, Dual Citizen could travel, and Scum could travel. Therefore, travelers have a higher percentage of being scum. Sadly for my theory, however, **sach** then clarified that the roles were samples only, and that not all Vanilla Town, Dual Citizen, or Scum roles need to be identical. So, it is possible that there are Vanillas who can travel, making travel currently a null tell. So it’s back to the usual Day One flailing about blindly/game mechanic speculation! To make is even clearer for you (again): I was originally planning to vote for someone traveling, but after getting more information, that doesn’t make sense, so I’m not going to do it. It’s extremely obvious what I am saying there, despite your repeated attempts to make it seem otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/216 "2010-12-11T20:35:24Z")
> [@Drain\_Bead](#): > > Limited time post: > > I think it’s mighty disingenuous that **ShadowFacts** is saying that nobody was coming out guns-a-blazing to lynch travelers, when his own post was the main one I was looking at when I made that statement. There were a lot of people who were expressing suspicion of travelers out of the gate in this game. Whether or not they actually would have followed it up with a vote was irrelevant in the overall point I was trying to make, which is that given the suspicion many people expressed regarding travel, I’d expect Scum (and really, pretty much everyone, actually) to lay low and not do it unless forced to by their role or outside forces. > > **vote ShadowFacts**. I see his actions here as trying to talk out both sides of his mouth. To honestly try to argue that nobody wanted to lynch travelers when one of his first posts in this game was expressing that his initial thoughts were to vote for travelers is quite squirrely. (vote bleached) And I find it disingenuous of you to completely ignore my previous response to you, in which I quoted every instance in the game to date of someone talking about travel, in an effort to find someone “guns blazing” to lynch travelers. I still haven’t found it, and apparently neither have you, since you haven’t addressed it. I found two total posts expressing suspicion of travelers, one of them pretty weak (as Plankton discussed earlier). Where is all the suspicion? You keep saying it’s there, but have offered no evidence, unlike me. In addition, I don’t know how many times I have to say it, but my first post was saying the opposite of what you are accusing me of. See the post above, and maybe you’ll see that you are wrong. It’s probably too much to ask for an apology 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Baffle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/dec6dc/32.png) [@Baffle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baffle)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/217 "2010-12-11T20:58:26Z")
> [@Wolverine](#): > > I know that nobody wants my support (through self-inflicted stupidity), but > \*\* > vote Baffle\*\* > > _Besides the many reasons listed above_, in my offline experiences scum survive longer if in the early part of the game they are not seen as united or linked. If Baffle is scum, then fellow scum should either take up the opposite side of the argument or stay quiet. Baffle had almost no support (or at least no direct support that I could find) which I would not expect if he were town and Pleonast was scum. Pleonast had several supporters (NAF1138 #101 before Baffle’s attack post #107, Rin Twisted #109 directly after Baffle’s post, both of them later #142-144, and others) which weakens the idea that Pleonast is scum. Unless all 3 of them on Pleonast’s side are scum which to me is not the usual strategy. > > If both Baffle and Pleonast are town, then my line of reasoning is screwed. Scum could pick any side and screw the other. It’s also possible that a scummy Pleonast is being defended by townies who have bought into his argument. Perhaps the scum are actually all involved in the Shadowfacts / Idle Thoughts debate and ignoring us entirely. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2010, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/218 "2010-12-11T22:50:42Z")
I’ve just completed a second read, and need to digest what I’ve read before coming to a decision on who to vote for (besides, we’ve got a little time yet - something under 48 hours (as distinct from the twelve Hours of the Day). One thing I would like to weigh in on is this; I am leaning in favour of the mass claim of travel powers, if only slightly. Developing this information may help us to detect unusual events when they happen and alert us to Untoward Things. For example, if at +24:00 Rin Twisted departs for Wellington, we don’t know whether he decided to off his own bat or was forced to by some outside agency. However, if **NAF** were on that plane, we would know something hinky was going on; NAF has claimed he cannot travel, so either he’s shown to be a liar, or some other power role has acted on him and allowed/forced him to travel. But, absent the information that NAF cannot travel, we have no reason to suppose anything is going on. Similarly, if Pleo _doesn’t_ leave for Wellington, we need to grill him over the discrepancy between his claim and his actions. ---
**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:** [December 11, 2010, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/219 "2010-12-11T23:59:33Z")
@MHaye: > [@](#): > > Win Conditions > The International Crime Ring (ICR) win if they manage to equal or out number Town players. > Town Players win when all ICR have been gaoled. > **A Stalemate is also a possible outcome.** A stalemate is also possible. If we reveal all of our travelers, a losing scum team could conceivably force a stalemate by killing our travelers, thus preventing us from switching sides to lynch them. That would suggest to me that we want to keep our travelers somewhat secret, against that possibility. I pointed that out earlier, but it was inside a big mess of a post so I’m thinking you missed it. I’m not suggesting we should never claim traveler or non-traveler, but I’d like to see some quality discussion weighing the costs and benefits of doing so. After all, we can’t undo it. So far, I’ve just seen a lot of “well, it might help?” from people. Second point: I don’t see the benefit of forcing people to choose between traveler and non-traveler. We don’t know how many of each there is, so there’s no benefit to lying about it. Scum can be 100% honest and we’re no closer to catching them. However, scum gain plenty from knowing who our travelers are. Consider further that it’s likely some of our power roles are travelers, and I’m not seeing the benefit. ---
**Author:** ![Rin\_Twisted](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/82dd89/32.png) [@Rin\_Twisted](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rin_Twisted)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2010, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553/220 "2010-12-12T00:59:00Z")
mod, can we get a vote count? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/international-mafia/562553.md?page=12)