# Lord of the Rings Mafia **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [August 10, 2010, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867 "2010-08-10T19:56:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 37
**Author:** ![USCDiver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/uscdiver/32/354_2.png) [@USCDiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/USCDiver)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/721 "2010-08-17T01:47:50Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > I was thinking about \*\*Chronos \*\*and his information, and I came up with the following: > > He says that he’s confident that he can tell whether or not the person has a power from the name they are given. That would mean the person is someone like Gandalf or Aragorn (power), or Odo Proudfoot or Barliman Butterbur (no power), rather than, say, Gimli or Merry (could go either way). But what makes Chronos think he can tell this from the name? I’m guessing that Chronos has a ‘powerful’ identity, and that he’s extrapolating that to the rest of the game. \*\*Chronos \*\*has said he is confident that the Player/Role name he knows is Town aligned, but I don’t recall him saying he was confident he could discern whether they had a Power role or not. Can you point me to that post? ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/722 "2010-08-17T01:55:54Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I’m pretty sure that Lurtz showed up in the books, too, and just got emphasized more in the movie. I think there were leaders of orc bands, but I don’t think any were named. I could be mistaken ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/723 "2010-08-17T01:57:13Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > > [@special\_ed](#): > > > > We add the risk of identifying specific roles to Scum and/or 3rd party who might need to know who is which role, not just that they align. > > We’ve been through that > > Yes, I know, while also putting risk on scum. One can argue for or against it based on tolerance risk. There is a trade off. > > A consistency claim removes all risk from scum (it’s trivially easy to claim yes), while not removing the risk from town (by singling out certain townies). There is no trade off and it does not favor town. Except in the ways in which I already detailed. It can also put to rest the question does role name indicate alignment. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/724 "2010-08-17T02:00:38Z")
> [@peekercpa](#): > > and now we go down the slippery path. > > what if gandalf were to be killed by a balrog? then he comes back stonger, right? and i was not involved in the set up in this game but would that not be a potential based on canon? i can see **maha** , **story** and **sach** laughing their asses off at this point. In Ula’s LotR game on Facebook, Gandalf was a Doc who came back as a Cop (or maybe the other way around). Santo Rugger had the role, and claimed Mason, I was a real mason and led a lynch of him immediately. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/725 "2010-08-17T02:04:11Z")
> [@peekercpa](#): > > and the fact that you are predicting deaths on Day 1 for Day 3 makes me highly nervous. but shoot i am always like that so take it with a grain of salt. Really? I think it’s safe to predict that we _might_ have 4 deaths by Day 3. IN a game this large, I certainly hope we average 2 deaths per Day. That’s only 1 death that isn’t caused by a lynch. That’s a good thing. And it’s not so slow that well be playing until the end of the 4th Age ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/726 "2010-08-17T02:05:28Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > So what does this tell us? I take it as evidence that the roles in this game do align with the canon, and that the ‘powerful’ characters are more likely to have powers in game (something that I already assumed without having any evidence whatsoever). Whether or not there is any other value to this, I don’t know. It’s only evidence that Chronos thinks so. And didn’t he say he could tell the alignment, not the power? Or did I miss something else too? ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/727 "2010-08-17T02:09:33Z")
> [@USCDiver](#): > > > [@Astral\_Rejection](#): > > > > As for USCDiver, I was content with my reading of Chronos’ case. But I missed a vital piece of information in my reading of it, which, in review, made him seem more town to me. I’m getting crucified here for changing my mind **three days before the day ends** , and I have to wonder if some of the people questioning me aren’t trying to cement me as an early lynch candidate. > > > > Yes, if scum had access to a PM, they’d be willing to offer up more info to help their case. _But we’re assuming they have access to a PM._ We have only circumstantial evidence that that’s the case. If he had said “I agree with all of them” and offered nothing more, as I first thought Chronos was saying, my vote would still be on him. > > > > But that’s not the case. I went and checked, and I’m no longer so convinced. He made a good faith effort to add information, information that could possibly be used against him if he was scum. This doesn’t mean he’s town, but my suspicious eye was content to move elsewhere for the time being. > > I think is the most damning evidence actually. That you would place a vote based solely on another player’s reasoning (even one who you may consider to be Town) and not doing any further examination of that evidence is quite scummy. Just a ‘me too’ vote essentially. The fact that you back-slid a short time later does little to assuage my suspicions of you. I appreciate this assessment. I think you may be onto something here ---
**Author:** ![Telcontar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/728 "2010-08-17T02:17:03Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > > [@peekercpa](#): > > > > so sometimes someone comes up with an idea that is bad? and we should discuss it? and if turns out that the idea was bad (i am assuming that equates to bad for town) then we just dismiss it, right? > > > > but i thought bad for town equals scum based on earlier posts. why shouldn’t we just nail them at that point since that is an indicator of being scum? > > To repeat for **peeker** and others who do not read for comprehension: suggesting ideas (even bad ideas) is pro-town. Discussing ideas (even bad ideas) is pro-town. Actually doing bad ideas is anti-town. > > > [@Telcontar](#): > > > > Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. I got the name/alignment congruence idea from lost mafia. It poses no risk to town and provides town information that is currently only available to scum (who know multiple characters names). > > If you think it poses no risk for town are you suggesting that no townie has an incongruent name/alignment? Or, are you suggesting there is no risk of lynching and no risk of being preferentially killed by non-town for any townie whose name and alignment are incongruent? I have no idea whether any townie has an incongruent name/alignment. That’s the whole point of the request. If they do, then I’m going to assume that town isn’t full of blithering idiots, and thus won’t lynch someone because of a silly and fairly baseless assumption about how the mods made the game. As for whether scum or third party would preferentially kill…I really don’t see why they would. And, if they did, I have no reason to assume that those town are of any greater benefit to town than other town (if anything, possibly less). > [@peekercpa](#): > > > [@Telcontar](#): > > > > Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. I got the name/alignment congruence idea from lost mafia. It poses no risk to town and provides town information that is currently only available to scum (who know multiple characters names). We’ll probably find out by Day 3 the general shape of the canon in this game (most likely 4 dead), but this gives us a good idea today. > > \ > > this post bothers me tremendously. i understand that i will have now pissed off a significant number of folks in this game but … > > i did not play in lost so take that as you will. but even if i had i would no more being making a conclusion about scum knowledge as it relates to this game. certainly if this in fact a metagame observation then i would understand, but it doesn’t read that way to me. and the fact that you are predicting deaths on Day 1 for Day 3 makes me highly nervous. but shoot i am always like that so take it with a grain of salt. Jeez you’re nuts. Lynch day 1. Night kill night 1. Lynch day 2. Night kill night 2. 4 dead. "Most likely’ because of third parties and doctors. And it is a meta game point. In lost we debated this as prelude to a name claim (as a name claim would be pointless if alignments didn’t match). We couldn’t find any harm then. I don’t see any harm in an alignment claim now, unless town is stupid or scum is lucky (and scum luck is, to the best of my knowledge, constant). Also if there are a substantial number of “no match” responses then Chronos’s information will have to be seen in a different light. ---
**Author:** ![Telcontar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/729 "2010-08-17T02:18:52Z")
In the above post I almost seconded Diver’s analysis, but decided not to. I see now that Ed did, and wanted to toss my hat in the ring as well. I’m comfortable with my vote, but I’m doing a reread of astral first thing Tomorrow (that’s two, bleh). He is a new player though, right? That colors things. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/730 "2010-08-17T02:28:53Z")
> [@](#): > > He says that he’s confident that he can tell whether or not the person has a power from the name they are given. That would mean the person is someone like Gandalf or Aragorn (power), or Odo Proudfoot or Barliman Butterbur (no power), rather than, say, Gimli or Merry (could go either way). What I actually said was that it was likely to be able to determine that, not that I was confident. It is, of course, possible that I’m wrong. As to the question of whether to name the role: The way I see it, the best I can hope to get out of my power is to confirm this other person, and possibly also myself. A confirmed Townie can expect to get Night-killed by the Scum; there’s no shame in that. So if I can set things up so that the other person is confirmed regardless of whether I’m Night-killed, then I’ve done my job. Now, if I say the name of the role and nothing else, and then die toNight: I’ll be revealed as Town, so everyone will know I was telling the truth, and that the role I specified really is in the game. If, after that point, a Scum claims that role, then we can expect that the real person will counter-claim, since catching a Scum in a lie is pretty much always worth exposing a power role: Town either ends up lynching the Scum on the first try, or at worst, kills both of them. So, since a Scum who claims will be counter-claimed, we can assume that if someone claims that role and _isn’t_ counter-claimed, then that person is confirmed. And the decision of when to become confirmed is left in the hands of the single person best-qualified to make that decision, which is also good. Now, to address **ed** ’s concern, that I’m looking for a specific character, for some nefarious reason: When the person with that role does eventually claim, I’ll either be still alive, or dead. If I’m dead, then I’m obviously no threat to that person. And if I’m alive, then I was either lying or telling the truth when I originally said that I knew who had that role. If I was telling the truth, then I obviously wasn’t hunting for that person, since I’ve already found em. If I was lying, then that would become evident when I either fail to confirm my hashcrumb, or I confirm it and it doesn’t say who the person was, and I get killed that Day. In other words: If I die before the other person claims, or if I’m still alive when the other person claims but was honest, or if I’m still alive when the other person claims but was lying, in any of those situations I’m no threat to the person. ---
**Author:** ![Telcontar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/731 "2010-08-17T02:54:09Z")
@Chronos: Just for completeness sake - unless you have a day power or other odd wincon. I think the odds of that are sufficiently low, however. ---
**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:** [August 17, 2010, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/732 "2010-08-17T03:21:38Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > He says that he’s confident that he can tell whether or not the person has a power from the name they are given. That would mean the person is someone like Gandalf or Aragorn (power), or Odo Proudfoot or Barliman Butterbur (no power), rather than, say, Gimli or Merry (could go either way). > > What I actually said was that it was likely to be able to determine that, not that I was confident. It is, of course, possible that I’m wrong. > > As to the question of whether to name the role: The way I see it, the best I can hope to get out of my power is to confirm this other person, and possibly also myself. A confirmed Townie can expect to get Night-killed by the Scum; there’s no shame in that. So if I can set things up so that the other person is confirmed regardless of whether I’m Night-killed, then I’ve done my job. > > Now, if I say the name of the role and nothing else, and then die toNight: I’ll be revealed as Town, so everyone will know I was telling the truth, and that the role I specified really is in the game. If, after that point, a Scum claims that role, then we can expect that the real person will counter-claim, since catching a Scum in a lie is pretty much always worth exposing a power role: Town either ends up lynching the Scum on the first try, or at worst, kills both of them. So, since a Scum who claims will be counter-claimed, we can assume that if someone claims that role and _isn’t_ counter-claimed, then that person is confirmed. And the decision of when to become confirmed is left in the hands of the single person best-qualified to make that decision, which is also good. > > Now, to address **ed** ’s concern, that I’m looking for a specific character, for some nefarious reason: When the person with that role does eventually claim, I’ll either be still alive, or dead. If I’m dead, then I’m obviously no threat to that person. And if I’m alive, then I was either lying or telling the truth when I originally said that I knew who had that role. If I was telling the truth, then I obviously wasn’t hunting for that person, since I’ve already found em. If I was lying, then that would become evident when I either fail to confirm my hashcrumb, or I confirm it and it doesn’t say who the person was, and I get killed that Day. In other words: If I die before the other person claims, or if I’m still alive when the other person claims but was honest, or if I’m still alive when the other person claims but was lying, in any of those situations I’m no threat to the person. Because a couple people asked, here is the exact quote from Post 436: > [@](#): > > The role name is of an unambiguously good-aligned character, so I trust that that person is Town. Knowing the role name would also give the Scum a good chance of deducing whether that person is a power role (i.e., the name is either one that’s very likely to be a power role, or one that’s very likely to be vanilla). So, yes, you said it was ‘very likely’, not that you were ‘confident’. That’s what I get for not taking the time to search for the post earlier. And technically, you didn’t say that \*you \*would be able to deduce anything, only that the Scum could…but I’m willing to bet you’re at least as smart as they are… Now that we have that cleared up… I was taught to stick up for what I believe is right, even if nobody else does. I was also told to admit when I’m wrong. I’ve been doing the former for a few days now, but I’m not so stubborn as to completely ignore all of the arguments put forth against me. So, I was wrong. I underestimated the potential benefit. I agree that it would be best for Chronos to reveal the name Today. I stand firm in thinking that there is no benefit to a mass alignment claim. I still think there is no way anyone is going to claim that their role does not match the canon. And I think that a mass name claim is an actively bad idea, because I think it would give the Scum too many pointers toward the Town Power Roles. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/733 "2010-08-17T03:55:01Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Now, to address **ed** ’s concern, that I’m looking for a specific character, for some nefarious reason: When the person with that role does eventually claim, I’ll either be still alive, or dead. If I’m dead, then I’m obviously no threat to that person. And if I’m alive, then I was either lying or telling the truth when I originally said that I knew who had that role. If I was telling the truth, then I obviously wasn’t hunting for that person, since I’ve already found em. If I was lying, then that would become evident when I either fail to confirm my hashcrumb, or I confirm it and it doesn’t say who the person was, and I get killed that Day. In other words: If I die before the other person claims, or if I’m still alive when the other person claims but was honest, or if I’m still alive when the other person claims but was lying, in any of those situations I’m no threat to the person. I said that while I didn’t have a correct understanding of what was said. I apparently mis-read. I didn’t know that you claimed to know who had the rolename that you knew. I can still think of a few nefarious reasons for your actions, and I still only have your word that you know what you do know. I will be looking things over, and I can say it’s more than possible that my vote will move off of you at some point, as others have done things that make me more suspicious. But that will wait. After my brief 12 week vacation, work starts ion the morning. ---
**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:** [August 17, 2010, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/734 "2010-08-17T04:12:29Z")
> [@USCDiver](#): > > > [@Astral\_Rejection](#): > > > > As for USCDiver, I was content with my reading of Chronos’ case. But I missed a vital piece of information in my reading of it, which, in review, made him seem more town to me. I’m getting crucified here for changing my mind **three days before the day ends** , and I have to wonder if some of the people questioning me aren’t trying to cement me as an early lynch candidate. > > > > Yes, if scum had access to a PM, they’d be willing to offer up more info to help their case. _But we’re assuming they have access to a PM._ We have only circumstantial evidence that that’s the case. If he had said “I agree with all of them” and offered nothing more, as I first thought Chronos was saying, my vote would still be on him. > > > > But that’s not the case. I went and checked, and I’m no longer so convinced. He made a good faith effort to add information, information that could possibly be used against him if he was scum. This doesn’t mean he’s town, but my suspicious eye was content to move elsewhere for the time being. > > I think is the most damning evidence actually. That you would place a vote based solely on another player’s reasoning (even one who you may consider to be Town) and not doing any further examination of that evidence is quite scummy. Just a ‘me too’ vote essentially. The fact that you back-slid a short time later does little to assuage my suspicions of you. You mean the further examination I did, which then caused me to unvote you? ---
**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:** [August 17, 2010, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/735 "2010-08-17T04:21:13Z")
> [@Hoopy\_Frood](#): > > > [@Astral\_Rejection](#): > > > > His claim is one reason. His suggestion that the fellowship claim is another. That’s a number of reasons right there. I also didn’t think his snarky comments about other posters earlier in the thread helped the town, but I didn’t feel that that warranted mentioning. On day 1, I don’t really have much else to go for. My evidence against Chronos when I was questioning him was arguably just as flimsy, but nobody had an issue with that. > > I don’t think he was asking for a repeat of your other reasons. Guiri wanted to know why you unvoted Pleo based on the arguments he (i.e. Pleo) and I gave against one of your reasons, that being that you didn’t like Pleo’s idea. You had other reasons you found Pleo suspicious, so what was it about the one we specifically countered that made you change your vote. > > It’s a good question from Guiri, and I’d like to know the answer as well. My two major reasons for voting for him are 1) his claim and 2) his idea. Most of the people in this game are content to ignore his claim, far more than could be scum alone. Same goes for his mass claim idea; more people than could be just scum are telling me that discussing his idea can have pro-town ramifications. I don’t know enough at this point to argue either issue, and neither of my points are terribly damning anyway. Therefore, I’m content to unvote him. Hell, I might vote for him again before the day is over, who knows? ---
**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:** [August 17, 2010, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/736 "2010-08-17T04:43:26Z")
Last post for tonight, I promise! I’d like to point out that only 45 minutes passed between my vote and unvote for USCDiver. There could absolutely be scum motivation there; perhaps it was a defensive vote, designed to protect one of my scum allies that I then thought better of. Somebody suggested just such a thing up above. But there’s also town motivation. Last night, I read Chronos’ post and really got behind it. It made sense to me, so I excitedly made my first vote of the game. To my mind, that’s what votes are for; I find something suspicious, and I vote. I can always change my mind later. Then I checked some other threads here on the straight dope. And as I was surfing around, I thought, hell, why am I trusting Chronos? I should take a look at what I’m agreeing to. And, as I’ve written many, many times, I went back to the post in question and noticed my mistake. Lastly, I’d like to remind everyone that I read Harry Potter Mafia, and I was spoiled for most of it. The mistake someone upthread accused me of making is exactly the same mistake Omi made that netted town two scum. I find it doubtful that I’d make the same mistake **IF** I were scum, but stranger accidents have happened. I won’t even pretend to present that as evidence of my innocence, but it is something to keep in mind. I hope it doesn’t seem too scummy to point that out. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![cucuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@cucuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cucuy)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/737 "2010-08-17T06:30:24Z")
My role name is also in line with the canon. And I think it’s safe to assume that Boromir would be considered “good”, in canon. That is not to say he’d unequivocally be on the side of town in this game. And incidentally, it was The Ring that “recruited” both Boromir and Frodo to the sides of evil (as well as Smeagol/Gollum). It’s possible that all three roles, in this game, could feasibly follow canon and yet not be who we think they are. ---
**Author:** ![cucuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@cucuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cucuy)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/738 "2010-08-17T06:54:32Z")
> [@Natlaw](#): > > > [@cucuy](#): > > > > My concern is, if town PMs are not alike, or based on the same template, it could lead to confusion over alignment. If scum have been given VT templates as cover, it would make sense that VTs would have varying templates in order to identify their alignment in case scum produce a PM of their cover. (Does this make sense?) > > This doesn’t make sense to me: why should a vanilla posting a varying role PM identify his alignment? I assume you mean proof that their alignment is town but that means you think any role PM posted is proof of alignment? > And what is the point of giving cover vanilla roles to scum if they still stand out compared to the all actual vanilla templates? What I’m trying to say is that scum may have been given cover roles roles to make them appear town; and these covers may be similar, with the exception of having different names. Meanwhile, vanilla townies are given PMs that spell out their name/role, alignment, and wincon, but no two VT PMs are identical word-for-word. This would foil scum if two or more posted cover PMs, since they’d be identical and town could call them out on that. But unless we know this to be true (which we don’t, at this point), then using handshakes to confirm town could be the wrong move if town PMs are not of the same template. But I think the last section of PMs is pretty much identical among both town and scum, so using that part for hashing could prove very useful. It’s been discussed that scum may have been given VT PMs. If that’s true, now they have a bit of WiFOM on how to use them. ---
**Author:** ![cucuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@cucuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cucuy)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/739 "2010-08-17T07:01:44Z")
> [@Suburban\_Plankton](#): > > I still don’t understand what seems to be a wide-held opinion that we can discount anything/everything peeker says, because he’s just “being himself”. I couldn’t care less whether he’s being himself, or if he’s acting completely out of character. I voted for peeker because I didn’t like the content of what he posted _ **in this thread** _. Maybe if I had played a number of gamed with him I might have a different opinion. But since I don’t have the benefit of history, I’m not using that to base my opinions. > > I don’t like voting for lurkers. I would much rather wait for them to post something, then make a decision based on that. That doesn’t mean I won’t change my mind at some point (the practice becomes less and less forgivable as more time passes), but for the moment I don’t find “lack of posting” to be a strong enough reason for a vote, since there are people who \*have \*posted things that I find suspicious. I still find it odd that you would call out the lurkers for their apparent lack of participation, and then claiming you don’t have anything against them, but then you vote on the one person because he is the most active participant in the game. **Vote Suburban Plankton** for pointing at a lot of things but not committing to one point in general. ---
**Author:** ![cucuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7feea3/32.png) [@cucuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cucuy)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2010, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867/740 "2010-08-17T07:20:39Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > “SAHM”? Stay at home mom? I don’t think that’s what you’re referring to. Please explain. “Swedes Are Handsome Men”? 😉 (Yes, I’m Swedish.) I understood **MHaye’s** acronym the moment I read it. There’s been more than one post mentioning “Sauron and his minions.” As for his reply on why he choose to use it, I’m not convinced it’s a slip. I may be missing something here. > [@Pleonast](#): > > It’s not quite enough for me to vote for him yet. But it’s safe to say that if I were a Vig (and I’m not commenting either way on that), **peeker** would be dead at the next Dawn. **I’ve vig’d him before for an anti-town posting style,** so he knows I’m not bluffing. (And nothing personal, I just don’t think it’s helping town in any way, and it sure makes it harder to find the few posts he does have useful comments in.) I’m curious: what was his alignment at that time? I think attacking **peeker** based upon his posting style is more reactive than helpful. From what I can tell (and my experience playing with him is limited to one game), he hasn’t ducked any questions and is carrying the discussions in his own inimitable manner. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867.md?page=36) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lord-of-the-rings-mafia/549867.md?page=38)