# Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [January 12, 2009, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855 "2009-01-12T01:11:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/21 "2009-01-12T14:04:31Z")
After all that, I’m going to **vote Hockey Monkey**. A series of votes that blend in with the crowd, coupled with a general lack of pro-town activity, gives me the sense of somebody keeping her head down carefully. For example, consider this first Day Four post, refuting Almost Human’s vote: > [@Hockey Monkey](#): > > That’s all you got? I admit I haven’t been all that active, but most of it was during the holidays. When I voted for Jsexton I said myself it was a me too vote. Then I unvoted and voted Macey. Then I hounded peeker about his confession, but because I was busy at work, I missed the opportunity to vote for him. Sorry! Then today I said that Cookies claim stunk. Not exactly insubstantial. You got me on that Day One me too first vote of the game though. So: Admits to low activity and me too voting. Voted **macey** , hounded the PFK, attacked Cookies claim - nothing that it isn’t plausible scum behaviour. For the rest of Day Four: [votes Blam](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10668023#post10668023), posts a [list](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10668089#post10668089), pushed [Blam](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=10670765#post10670765)for full role. That’s it. Again, nothing that isn’t as useful for scum as it is for town. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/22 "2009-01-12T14:47:38Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > Sorry to see you go, Naf. Well played, even when I was pissed at you for claiming with nothing we could confirm. I know I’ve pissed some people off (if not already they will eventually get pissed off) as to how I’ve played my role too. > > The half-dead folks count against the town win condition, even though Hawkeyeop’s win condition has not changed. Also, I know that there is someone out here in the woods, aligned with Town, who has an ability to Day kill the half-dead. > > Without being too bossy about how those kills should be performed, macey’s win condition is still that of the scum, and Hawkeyeop’s is that of the town. I think it is fairly obvious which one of them should be killed first. And now that Hawkeyeop and I are both kicking ourselves for chewing on each other so much, I’m hoping he can still be an asset for us while he’s still around to be. > > Someone out there may have an idea as to why I now know this information to pass along, and I think I know who you are, but I also have reason to believe that not all of the possible consequences of us having Nightly interludes are “good” consequences. So please keep that in mind. So is this reveal in conjunction with or in place of your Total Lost confirmation? ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/23 "2009-01-12T15:07:30Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > So is this reveal in conjunction with or in place of your Total Lost confirmation? I’m not sure I understand the question… ---
**Author:** ![Hockey\_Monkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a183cd/32.png) [@Hockey\_Monkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hockey_Monkey)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/24 "2009-01-12T15:07:31Z")
What the fuck is it with the obsession with my me too vote? It was my very first vote of the game. What the hell? I haven’t me too-ed every vote I’ve made. I’m really astounded by this, especially this late in the game. It’s making me very suspicious of the motivation of \*\*amrussell \*\*and **Almost Human** for bringing it up. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/25 "2009-01-12T15:27:19Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > So is this reveal in conjunction with or in place of your Total Lost confirmation? My information about Total Lost being not-a-Deadite was in my role PM. The information about the half-dead counting against the Town’s win condition and the existence of a Townie half-dead killer was provided to me last Night. ---
**Author:** ![dotchan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@dotchan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dotchan)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/26 "2009-01-12T15:38:23Z")
> [@Millit\_the\_Frail](#): > > Is there any reason to believe the claims that aren’t more-or-less confirmed? Or are we just separating them from the rest of us because they’ve made a claim? I’ve organized things that way mostly for my own benefit, so I have a quick reference to who has already claimed. I’m not 100% believing any of the unconfirmed claims (except my own, obviously 🙂 ), but since we have yet to mass-claim those are there for comparison once we do. **Cookies** , are you willing to say more about the nature of this information? Like, is this a side effect of you being Ash? Or are you being passed notes by somebody through the mod? ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/27 "2009-01-12T15:59:00Z")
> [@Hockey\_Monkey](#): > > What the fuck is it with the obsession with my me too vote? It was my very first vote of the game. What the hell? I haven’t me too-ed every vote I’ve made. I’m really astounded by this, especially this late in the game. It’s making me very suspicious of the motivation of \*\*amrussell \*\*and **Almost Human** for bringing it up. The first point is that if you’d done more stuff, there’d be more to talk about. But you’ve not been very active, so anyone looking at you is going to end up looking at the same things. That doesn’t make people who look at you scummy - it makes you a low-volume poster. But the main point is that my case isn’t built on your one vote. I quoted the post in which \*you \*mentioned it to point out that even in your own defence the best you can say is that you admit you’ve done stuff that looks scummy. My case is not that you made a me-too vote. It’s that throughout the game, you’ve hardly done anything that couldn’t equally well have been done by scum. If you want to refute my case, don’t pretend that I’m going on and on about one vote. That’s just misrepresentation. Point to all the pro-town stuff you’ve done. Show me some stuff you’ve done that scum probably wouldn’t, and I’ll admit my perception of you was wrong. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/28 "2009-01-12T16:00:21Z")
I’m not willing to say more at this time. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/29 "2009-01-12T16:06:01Z")
> [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/309): > > I honestly don’t know what Hal was referring to with his bandwagon comment. Perhaps he’ll grace us with more of an explanation. What’s to explain? You put up a weak vote for me, several others followed. Is there another definition? However, I’m reasonably sure you’re town _(Edit, now that I’ve made it to the D/N5 thread: Actually, you’re now as confirmed town as one could hope)_ so Unvote **ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies** Anyway, there was a comment made yesterDay that smacks of Perfect Information Syndrome: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/236): > > Hal claimed Alpha Redshirt (I think). No, I didn’t. I claimed “vanilla town”. However, **MHaye** hit it right on the head (albeit it with a qualifier). And while I certainly have my doubts that scum know our Alpha/Beta status off the bat, I could see a scum investigator taking a peek at me just to see if had been lurking because I was a pro-town power role, trying to keep things under wraps. Good enough reason for me to: Vote **MHaye** ---
**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:** [January 12, 2009, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/30 "2009-01-12T16:32:45Z")
Whoa! Nice catch, Hal! Am gonna take a closer look at Mhaye. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/31 "2009-01-12T16:37:44Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > My information about Total Lost being not-a-Deadite was in my role PM. The information about the half-dead counting against the Town’s win condition and the existence of a Townie half-dead killer was provided to me last Night. Thanks, that’s where my misunderstanding of your claims was. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/32 "2009-01-12T16:38:55Z")
Also. Damn, Hal. Interesting times. ---
**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:** [January 12, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/33 "2009-01-12T16:58:09Z")
On looking: First thing I noticed was how little he said at first. Despite about 16 posts before it, his first statement that has any real meat is this: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT TWO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-two/478862/160): > > Finally caught up with posts, so it’s time to vote. Hopefully the board won’t crash now. > > At the end of last Night, I didn’t have much in the way of suspicion. The things that had pinged me on Day 1 had been cleared up, or I’d settled in my own mind that the case was a mistake – and now Thing Fish is dead, I had to start anew Today. > > The first big thing to catch my eye was Dotchan’s vote in post [post=10621193]16[/post]. My impression was that it was a simple slip, and she’d switched Hockey Monkey (who did “me too” vote, and has never denied doing that) and DarkCookies. When this was pointed out, she unvoted; however, she did not immediately vote HM, who was the actual “me too” voter. Why not? > > Maybe Dot was just not suspicious of HM, or maybe she didn’t want to throw suspicion on HM. I could fall either way. > > As for HM’s “me too” vote, this can be scummy, but is not necessarily scummy. Laziness, efficiency (the other player has said what you were thinking so much more clearly than you could) or lack of time could all be reasons for a “me too vote” applicable to either Town or Scum. HM’s reaction (being up front with what she did) makes it a null tell for me; she’s either got a clear conscience or she’s facing her accusers down. I’m not voting for her just for this. > > I want to spend a little time thinking about Hawkeyeop. He’s had one or two theses in this game which have set my teeth on edge. The first one was floated last Night in post [post=10613667]D01.268[/post]. His suggestion that the quality of an argument helps determine whether the subject of the argument is scum is wrong. What it does help is in determining whether that subject gets lynched. It does not change the actual alignment of the subject at all. Mind you, if the subject is lynched, that reveals the alignment. Usually. Some games (see Pleonast’s Conspiracy games) obfuscate it for a while, though. However, that’s not a scumtell on its own. After all, Town can misstate things too. > > Hawk’s next thesis was in post [post=10624324]D02.037[/post]. My problem with it is that the standard position on votes (especially early-day votes like this) is that you should vote for who you think is most scummy. A vote for someone other than Macey yesterday, by any Townie, simply says “I think this person is scummier than Macey.” Any scum caught voting for someone other than Macey is in fact voting against a Macey lynch, but townspeople so voting are not. So the thesis is flawed. > > Now I know, from assisting Hawk with the last game, that he’s developing some radical theories about Mafia, and I want to discuss some of them; but doing it now will mean I don’t get a vote in. Also, I keep telling myself that floating ideas that provoke discussion is not necessarily a scum tell. It could be done to generate data or to obfuscate patterns that might be emerging to a scum eye. I think this qualifies for a note that Hawkeyeop needs to be watched for a while. > > Now I come to Peekercpa’s posts ([post=10628561]D02.099[/post] and [post=10628575]100[/post]). Here Peeker reveals (if he is telling the truth) that he’s playing some sort of game within a game. The thing is, what? It appears to be a claim that he killed Bufftabby. So he has a killing role. But (a) why did he strike Buff (who didn’t have much (if any) evidence pointing at her, at least as far as I recall) and (b) what is the purpose of his game? > > Now here I have to say that this is a bit reminiscent of the Marvel Mutants game set on Skrull Planet (see [here](http://psychopathgame.proboards106.com/index.cgi?board=skrull).) In this game, Peeker made a Day 1 claim of Miller – that is, a Town-aligned player who investigates as scum. Despite the inherent impossibility of distinguishing his true alignment with conventional investigators (and the person who did claim to do so was a lying scum), he wasn’t Nightkilled to test his claim. He had just enough of a downside to kill him to make us decide against lynching him, day after day, until finally we got some evidence to reveal the truth. > > Maybe he’s trying that gambit again? This time planning to claim vig, and manipulating us into not voting him, when he is in fact an SK? I can’t see that he’s scum, but I strongly suspect SK. > > In the absence of a strong pointer to scum, an SK will do. > > Vote **Peekercpa**. From day 2, where he makes a very safe vote, among other things. Lots of equivocating, something that stays true throughout. Next substance is halfway through day 3. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT THREE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-three/479484/110): > > That went faster than I anticipated. > > Most of the action since the fall of Night 2 has centred around the two claims of Detective type rolesThat makes three. players known or claiming to be a Detective. I could see Town getting three detectives working in different ways and each of which gets different information. That doesn’t mean that I believe all three (yet); I’m maintaining a healthy scepticism on both the claimed detectives, looking for ways we can test their claims and inconsistency between the results. > > NAF’s claim. > NAF either has the powers he claims, or doesn’t. If he doesn’t, given the way he’s approached it he’d be a deadite. Suppose (for the purpose of this argument) that he does not have the powers. Then he’s not Town, because he’s lying, and even if you think that’s reasonable for a Townsperson NAF could horribly mislead us. If he’s PFK then every time he “tests” a statement saying “I am town aligned” or similar, he risks calling a Townsperson a nonTown. The likely followup to such an accusation is the death of the accused, and he immediately stands exposed as a liar, gets lynched and loses. No, if he is false claiming the powers, he pretty much has to be a deadite. > > If NAF has the powers he claims, he’s on a lot safer ground, whatever his alignment. He really is testing one statement per Night, and really gets some results back. By cherry-picking the statement he tests, he can pursue his own agenda.[ol][li]A townie NAF wants to build a Masonry, or failing that find liars to get lynched.[/li][li]A deadite NAF probably wants to build a pool of players he says is Town, and most of whom would be; however, he’d also be aiming to conceal a bad apple in the bunch. For an example of this sort of scum play (from another direction) see Pedescribe’s game and particularly the hunt for the recruited player.[/li][li]A PFK NAF would be using these powers to pursue his win condition. We could speculate endlessly and fruitlessly on what that wincon is. (A variant on Hal’s Riddler wincon where he has to correctly list all the players and alignments to win; possibly with a deadline of so many Days or so many living players, might work.) However, it’s still a poor fit for a PFK to claim in this way, especially when NAF was under no real pressure when he claimed.[/ol]If you ask me whether NAF does have the claimed powers I’d say yes; the gambit makes little sense if he doesn’t. That’s supported by the quoted PM, which has the Storyteller feel.[/li] > If you ask what his alignment is, I’d say he’s more likely to be Town than deadite, and much more likely to be deadite than PFK. > > Chucara’s reactions to NAF’s claim. > > Chucara seems (from where I sit) to have done his best to obfuscate his alignment by providing so many statements that can be tested. His behaviour in (for example) claiming both Alpha Redshirt and Beta Redshirt is a prime example – if NAF picks (say) the latter statement and gets a “false,” then Chucara can simply claim to be the other, and discerning the truth of that will take another investigation, thus wasting time. This gives the appearance of wanting to appear helpful while actually trying to dodge a bullet. > > Surely, the most pro-Town way to deal with the problem of not wanting to reveal Alpha/Beta status is to claim vanilla Town but refuse to reveal what is status is. > > Chucara clearly isn’t a Town power role. He pushed hard for an alpha/beta claim (see particularly [post=10609414]post D01.221[/post])). This idea was filled with several questionable assumptions (to say the least), one of which was that Town power roles had Alpha/Beta status, something he’d have known was false if he had been a Town power role (at least, Pedescribe so testifies, and Pedescribe is very possibly in a position to know). This does, however, show Chucara has a significant concern with Alpha/Beta status, and I cannot see why unless it has something to do with his role; and if it does, he’s not vanilla. Thus, he’s probably not Town at all, and that’s good enough for a vote. > > **Vote Chucara** > > Diggit’s claim. > Diggit’s claim is interesting. The flavour of the role, a medium investigator, is a good fit to this game where dead people don’t die, and indeed some can still post strategy. (We can trust Hawkeyeop’s motivation, even though we know he has access to only the basic level – his own role plus what he learned here). > > Diggit has been deliberately sparse with supporting details, in particular whether he can actually question a dead player more than once, and whether he is restricted in who he can ask (for example, can he question someone who’s alignment differs from his own, and if he does how does he know the spirit won’t lie?) > > I have to say that this doesn’t feel like the sort of role you’d give a deadite; they probably just want the dead to shut up and not reveal their secrets from beyond the grave. It’s actually a better fit for the Riddler-type PFK role that’s been mentioned above. Like NAF’s claim, this claim makes no sense if Diggit doesn’t really have the claimed powers. > > Overall, I’d say Diggit is most likely to be Town, with a possibility of being a PFK; however the chances of him being a deadite are vanishingly small. > > Time to go blow stuff up. This may be the close of the Red Hand, after which it’s switch DM time. > > See you after Nigthfall. He concludes NAF is town, because if he wasn’t, it would be high risk, low reward. Again, a safe argument. He also concludes Chucara is PFK for the same reason I did: his obsession with the AlphaBeta. Fair enough. One thing sticks out, though–he [MHaye] says that he [chuc] was trying to ‘obfuscate’ NAF by posting multiple statements. Except NAF’s power only works when he has statements to work with. The more statements provided, the more NAF can do. And since he’d have almost certainly told us which statement he investigated, chuc’s idea would have only helped. Also says Diggit’s probably not a deadite. Next, explains self in night three here: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT THREE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-three/479484/158): > > What can I say? I was due out by about 35 minutes before that post was submitted. I missed stuff out. > > I don’t think that Chucara’s expressed willingness to run a 50-50 risk of death for some benefits (I assume you meant “net benefit” rather than “not benefit?”) swayed me very much, primarily because of of post [post=10644957]D03.065[/post]. > > That post gave me the impression (at the time) that Chucara was out to confuse you. I thought I’d made that clear in my post here :(Emphasis added.) > > I took the claim of being willing to sacrifice himself as flim-flammery, more than offset by the smokescreen he seemed to me to be throwing up. In retrospect I should certainly have discussed it, because it is a pointer that runs counter to my belief. However, I don’t believe (now) that it would have changed my mind at the time. > > While on the subject of current versus contemporary knowledge, something occurred to me last night. Thing Fish _could_ have investigated Bufftabby. She was still alive when his investigation was submitted, and was a scum. Whether Buff counted as someone TF interacted with is something I aim to look into this evening. Ah, the marvels of thread searching in this new vBulletin. > > (Macey, otoh, was dead when TF submitted his investigation, so we can safely leave him off the lists.) > > I don’t know what would happen if the investigated player wasn’t on one of the lists. It would actually make all the questions as written unanswerable, which means you’d waste a Night’s investigation. Of course, the fact that the questions didn’t get answered would be an answer (of a kind) in itself. Not much here, except to point out that buff could have been investigated by TF. Again, helpful; again, safe. Next post [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10653882&postcount=197): Even less substance than usual. Claims to have a good reason for lurking; based more on metagaming than in-gaming, or perhaps RL–just like Blaster Master. Part 2 in a bit. ---
**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:** [January 12, 2009, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/34 "2009-01-12T17:00:57Z")
Two apologies for inactivity, then: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/196): > > I’ve got up to Today’s [post=10662220]post 35[/post] in my second read, and I can’t let this pass. > > NAF said :If I’m happy to let a Day end without a vote because I didn’t see a strong enough case on a player, then maybe the fact that I placed a vote on someone suggests that I thought there was some evidence against him? > > The last time I intentionally abstained was Skrull Planet, and I only did that on Day 1. My purpose was to say “I don’t believe we should lynch either of the two leaders, but really don’t have enough on any of the others.” Once we get past day 1, or maybe 2, I don’t believe in deliberate abstention. > > I still think his actions in claiming to be both Alpha and Beta Redshirt are actions a nonTown player would take and a Town-aligned player would not. The fact that he did proves him guilty of poor play (sorry Chucara, but that’s what it is). If for some reason he didn’t want to reveal his Alpha/Beta status then the statement “I am vanilla Town” suffices perfectly well for the test. My vote was for that obfuscation. > > At the point I voted, he’d have been lynched anyway (the most votes on another player at that point were 2), so I didn’t need to jump on the train to ensure he was lynched; I could have abstained and it would have happened anyway. My vote was made purely because I found his actions that Day scummy. > > And with that, I have to get some tea before continuing with second reading. This. Emphasizes that he still thought that chuc was obfuscating, something I disagree with. Claims to still be rereading, something he does a lot. Analysis comes forthwith; however, it is analysis from day 4, instead of overall, like the rereads promise: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/217): > > The main topic of the Day seems to have been BlaM. > > Firstly, I understand BlaM’s motivation in changing his playstyle from game to game. He’s doing it not for the benefit it brings to a single game, but to the benefit it brings to the games he participates in; he enjoys it more if he’s doing different stuff, and so far (at least not in _my_ memory) no-one’s called his variations anti-Town before. > > Whether this particular style is anti-Town or not I’m not sure; it certainly attracted a lot of attention and a significant number of votes, stirring the pot somewhat. BlaM’s explanations are plausible, but in all honesty I don’t think it tells us anything. I suspect players who wish to can behave like that whatever their alignment, even scum. > > What did catch my eye though, was BlaM trying to skate round a straightforward assertion that he is a Townsperson. It’s been on my mind a bit recently, you’ll understand. It’s not that I didn’t understand the prhrase “that goes without saying” is an indirect agreement; it’s that NAF was fairly clear [post=10633236]in his roleclaim[/post] that the statement he tests must have “an absolute truth value” or he gets “WOOF” back. Now, BlaM has been lurking (ie reading but not posting), and is a fairly sharp cookie besides; he should have known why NAF wanted an explicit statement, but he skated round it twice. > > On the other hand, when he did finally say it, he didn’t try and hide it or throw out a high volume of testable statements in the hope that NAF picks one that he can explain away as and when NAF gets a bad reading. > > Then we come to [post=10667983]post 132[/post]. Again, my teeth itch. BlaM says, in the context of replying to Jsexton’s challenge about whether there is a scum benefit to the way he changes playstyles : Here we part company over the definition of lurker; a player who reads the thread but doesn’t post is pretty much the _definition_ of lurker around here nowadays. Of course, this could be a case of differing definitions, so maybe we need to check understandings. > > BlaM, what is your definition of “lurker?” > > I’m going to read the rest of the thread before deciidng who to vote for. I still have 2 hours. Says that BlaM’s lurking is a null tell. I’m not so sure, but it’s certainly a minor point. Points out the skirting of the ‘I am town’ statement, then equivocates. Points out that definition of lurking are different, and then he decides to be cautious. Again. Last substantial post: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/236): > > I think we’re at a tie now. thanks to Special Ed, who (if memory serves) was intending to vote BlaM earlier. I don’t know what happens in the event of a tie, but don’t think a no-lynch is in our favour. > > Hal claimed Alpha Redshirt (I think). > > The more BlaM revealed about his power claim, the more worried I got. He has nine separate powers, each of which can be used only once (except the last, which is used twice)? That seems an awful lot of powers to give to any Townsperson to me. > > The precedent of Ardent from Skrull Planet has been cited; but it is worth noting that he had no idea what the powers actually _did_, and in a Mafia context, making powers random weakens the player. A player with this number of specific, known powers would have to be balanced by a very strong Deadite group. Then, if BlaM dies early the Deadite group runs roughshod over the rest. > > I’m sorry, but I don’t believe BlaM is a Townsperson with those powers. > > I don’t see him changing the paragraph numbering to give the impression of greater powers – if anything, he’d have started the numbering of the quoted powers at 1, then admitted he was hiding the exact number of powers, to reduce the likelihood of being taken out by the Deadites. > > I can’t see this as a remotely plausible claim for a Deadite, either. It’s so unbelievable for this to be a Townsperson role the Deadites can’t possibly risk it. > > That leaves BlaM as the PFK. Recent discussions on difficulties the third party roles have suggests to me that one way to help an otherwise weak role is to give them powers that help stave off death. > > I really can’t see BlaM as anything other than a PFK. > > I think we’ve got enough time to waste a mislycvh on a claimed vanilla, and sort BlaM Tomorrow. > > The more BlaM revealed about his power claim, the more worried I got. He has nine separate powers, each of which can be used only once (except the last, which is used twice)? That seems an awful lot of powers to give to any Townsperson to me. > > The precedent of Ardent from Skrull Planet has been cited; but it is worth noting that he had no idea what the powers actually _did_, and in a Mafia context, making powers random weakens the player. A player with this number of specific, known powers would have to be balanced by a very strong Deadite group. Then, if BlaM dies early the Deadite group runs roughshod over the rest. > > I’m sorry, but I don’t believe BlaM is a Townsperson with those powers. > > I don’t see him changing the paragraph numbering to give the impression of greater powers – if anything, he’d have started the numbering of the quoted powers at 1, then admitted he was hiding the exact number of powers, to reduce the likelihood of being taken out by the Deadites. > > I can’t see this as a remotely plausible claim for a Deadite, either. It’s so unbelievable for this to be a Townsperson role the Deadites can’t possibly risk it. > > That leaves BlaM as the PFK. Recent discussions on difficulties the third party roles have suggests to me that one way to help an otherwise weak role is to give them powers that help stave off death. > > I really can’t see BlaM as anything other than a PFK. > > [color=blue]Vote **Blaster Master** > > Sorry BlaM. He was right, I’ll give him that. But, as I said earlier, votes for BlaM are a null tell, since both town and scum would want Freddie Kruger dead. Points out unusualnesss of powers, and how Arcade was different. A fair point, but a null tell. So. MHaye. He’s been very quiet, with most of his substance being equivocation, or safe and cautious points. He has flown under the radar (mostly) so far, is that his goal? He said he’d pick up participation, and it definitly had an upward trend, but overall it’s still low. No, I think he’s trying to divert suspicion through low participation, especially considering what he’s done–attack two PFK’s and shrug about most everything else. Vote MHaye ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/35 "2009-01-12T17:21:48Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Last substantial post: > > He was right, I’ll give him that. But, as I said earlier, votes for BlaM are a null tell, since both town and scum would want Freddie Kruger dead. Points out unusualnesss of powers, and how Arcade was different. A fair point, but a null tell. > > Vote MHaye MHaye’s last substantial post is very odd, because it repeats itself half way through. The first half looks like it’s building up to lynch Hal, saying that Blam can wait a day and “we’ve got enough time to waste a mislynch on a claimed vanilla”. The second half is exactly the same, but concludes with the vote on Blam. MHaye, it seems that you tried to change his mind on preview, having seen that Hal was now tied. But having solidly concluded that Blam was PFK, why even think about turning round and voting for Hal? Especially as you gave no reasoning, other than the need to break the tie, for suspecting Hal? ---
**Author:** ![Millit\_the\_Frail](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/51bf81/32.png) [@Millit\_the\_Frail](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Millit_the_Frail)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/36 "2009-01-12T19:06:12Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > \*\*Millit the Frail \*\*has also been very bandwagon happy, **particularly the two PFK votes**. I might almost find this more interesting than I should, because other than that I don’t have much of an impression. \*bolding mine Except…I never voted for **peeker**. Just so you’ve got your facts straight. ---
**Author:** ![Hockey\_Monkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a183cd/32.png) [@Hockey\_Monkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hockey_Monkey)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/37 "2009-01-12T19:11:12Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > The first point is that if you’d done more stuff, there’d be more to talk about. But you’ve not been very active, so anyone looking at you is going to end up looking at the same things. That doesn’t make people who look at you scummy - it makes you a low-volume poster. > > But the main point is that my case isn’t built on your one vote. I quoted the post in which \*you \*mentioned it to point out that even in your own defence the best you can say is that you admit you’ve done stuff that looks scummy. My case is not that you made a me-too vote. It’s that throughout the game, you’ve hardly done anything that couldn’t equally well have been done by scum. If you want to refute my case, don’t pretend that I’m going on and on about one vote. That’s just misrepresentation. Point to all the pro-town stuff you’ve done. Show me some stuff you’ve done that scum probably wouldn’t, and I’ll admit my perception of you was wrong. I’m not going to have us waste time today discussing this, as I’m easily confirmed by **pedescribe**. I’m a mason. That brings our pool of unknowns down by one, which I think is a good thing. ---
**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:** [January 12, 2009, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/38 "2009-01-12T19:14:47Z")
…Yup. Hockey Monkey is a mason. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/39 "2009-01-12T19:16:16Z")
amrussel, you sure seems to be in fling-and-hope-something-sticks mode… ---
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/40 "2009-01-12T19:20:08Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > **Little white lies…** > The half-dead folks count against the town win condition, even though Hawkeyeop’s win condition has not changed. Also, I know that there is someone out here in the woods, aligned with Town, who has an ability to Day kill the half-dead. > \ > Someone out there may have an idea as to why I now know this information to pass along, and I think I know who you are, but I also have reason to believe that not all of the possible consequences of us having Nightly interludes are “good” consequences. So please keep that in mind. I guess my scumdar really needs tuning, because it keeps pinging on confirmed townies. I got confused with **pedescribe** and his attractive mason post. This post by **Cookies** does not make complete sense to me either: 1. Like **special ed** , I took the “little white lies” title as meaning you didn’t tell your full power and are the one-fifth killer. It even made sense, you being the coward daughter of Ash who only dares to go after one-fifth Deadites. 2. But on reread it is a power Blaster Master claimed and it’s used by the actual one-fifth killer. 3. That means that person trusted you last Night. In my opinion a gamble because **NAF** wasn’t confirmed yet. Though if I read you right, you didn’t get a name of the player who contacted you, but could ask questions back? 4. The I-got-more-but-won’t-tell annoys me 😛 Anyway, the more useful questions to you, **Cookies** , or the actual one-fifth killer: Do you need help? I ask because Today neither **macey** nor **Hawkeyeop** burned up (only one burn in four days). So the killing has a failure rate or there is some other requirement. Or talked to Cookies instead of killing I guess. Actually, no need to answer, since with the two serial killer gone we got quite a buffer the one-fifth aren’t that important. > [@dotchan](#): > > Claimed (not counting the “I am Town” statements): > \*pedescribe, mason (more or less confirmed) > \*dotchan, Alpha Redshirt > \*zeriel, vanilla Town > \*ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies - “Ash” (confirmed by NAF) > \*TotalLost - (Cookies claimed) is not a Deadite (more or less confirmed) > \*Hal Briston, vanilla Town > > Investigation results from NAF (confirmed via NAF’s Death): > > - Millit - “I would be fine to truthfully claim” - Woof? > - ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies - “I am Ash” (?) - True I think it’s pretty save to assume **NAF** went for **Cookies** ’ “I am Town”, because he said “Cookies is town”, not Cookies is Ash (which would be a meaningless statement to test IMO). **NAF** wasn’t a naive cop (believes everything TRUE), because he got a FALSE and a WOOF? as well, so I believe his investigation about **Cookies** is correct (in case the previous paragraph suggested otherwise). **dotchan** has an extra point to be Alpha because **Blaster Master** couldn’t scare her into a heart attack. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855.md?page=3)