# 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:** 4
**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, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/61 "2009-01-12T21:44:10Z")
Hawkeyeop The Half-Dead counts _against_ the town win condition as long as he remains half-dead, dot. That was the information that I became privy to last night. His win condition hasn’t changed, which means he’s here participating with the Town’s best interests at heart, but he will need to be killed completely in order for us to win. What Natlaw was suggesting, I believe, is that we may want to keep the alpha/beta status on the down low if the scum advance their win condition more by killing alphas over betas, because we have one concrete precedent that an Alpha turned half-dead. ---
**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, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/62 "2009-01-12T22:09:49Z")
> [@Total\_Lost](#): > > I like the post from Natlaw - but I find myself in a position where I can say something I feel very strongly about: > > I think every player should vote for the person _they see as most pro-scum_. I like the vote records and the way they play a part in this game - but if every one not voting for the lynch-candidate (or the second one) is looked on with suspicion from that Day and for the rest of the game - we end up with having a Town scared of voting as they feel! > > The analysis of records are still very telling - but let’s not think that 3. vote is by scum and that Town would never have a single vote. I’m confused. Do you want us to vote for the person who’s done the most things to benefit scum, or the person we think the most are scum? Because those are different things. > [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > I wasn’t really talking to the unconfirmed with that statement, but I should’ve probably elaborated. > > It would be a Really Bad Idea for the 4 confirmed votes not to be on the same player, and we (the confirmed) need to not get lazy in advocating our cases. We need to a) find a scummy in the pile and b) sufficiently bring the the hearts and minds of ourselves and enough unconfirmed townies to pad our voting block with enough additional votes to form a firewall against the manipulating scum. > > Unconfirmed townies need to be voting for the most compelling case they see, and if that case ends up being contrary to where the confirmed block is looking, we have an opportunity to debate the alternatives. Okay. So what do you think about the MHaye case? I’d also be willing to vote Nanook, since unlike Hal he hasn’t shown up in, like, forever. ---
**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, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/63 "2009-01-12T22:29:53Z")
Millit the Frail - you’re right, I’m not reading my own vote-counts properly. Your bandwagons were Blam and Chucara. Secondly, it’d be really great if the various confirmed townies who think I’m suspicious could take the time to put an actual case together. All I’ve had so far is “he seems a bit suspicious”, “I’m getting a scummy vibe”, “amrussell’s looking a bit suspect”, “his eyes are too close together and they say his mother was from out of town”. I’m perfectly happy to defend my posts, but I am going to wait until there’s a case to defend. On which note: Cookies, flinging stuff and seeing what sticks \*is \*what I’m doing. I read people’s posts, look at vote patterns, find stuff that I think looks odd and challenge them on it. If I had a better plan, I’d use that. Let’s remember that so far we’ve caught one (1) scum, and that was because of a slip that sharper people than you or me found to be blatantly obvious. Lacking such glaring errors, lacking (surely) any more investigators…, it’s read and challenge, read and challenge. And finally, **unvote Hockey Monkey** ---
**Author:** ![JSexton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/64 "2009-01-12T22:47:56Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > Regarding \*\*Blam’s \*\*PM quotes yesterday - my instinct is that they were all accurate quotes. It was in \*\*Blam’s \*\*interest to confirm himself by giving us verifiable facts. So I’m betting that pedescribe was protected on Night One (from **Blam** , as it turns out) and obviously \*\*Cookies \*\*came out as he said, although that wasn’t as strong a prediction as he had hoped. This is a point in favour of **dotchan**. I won’t go so far as to say it’s complete confirmation, but it looks good. The flaw in this idea is this: We know he was a SK. It’s likely that he tried to kill more than once, al though he may have had supplemental powers, I really don’t think that he didn’t even attempt a kill for three days. I agree that he would want to be as honest as possible, but if he had more failed kills, he couldn’t very well admit to them. > [@](#): > > So scum were either bussing **macey** , making throwaway votes, or not voting. At a guess, I’m going to say 0-2 scum in the not-\*\*macey \*\*pile, 0-2 in the not-voting pile and 0-3 in the \*\*macey \*\*pile. Was this supposed to be helpful? I can’t help but think of ads that pitch “Save up to 20% or more!”. > [@](#): > > An embarrassingly large group of non-voters. Are scum more likely to not vote? Yes, if there was a large town on town wagon building, and they didn’t have time to fake a case against someone else. What? Why would scum fake a case on someone if a townie was already being bandwagoned? What’s the motivation there? > [@](#): > > \*\*JSexton \*\*voted 6th on macey, then didn’t vote for two days. Then came out to vote for 5th for **Blam**. That could look a lot like someone keeping his nose clean. Or it might be indicative of my playstyle. Once I find a place for a vote, it tends to stay there until that player is dead, or I’ve been given a REALLY good reason to unvote. And until I have a reason (or want to gambit, admittedly) my vote goes no where. With these short days, I often haven’t found a place I’m happy voting. > [@](#): > > \*\*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. It’s interesting that you found a way to smudge both me a Millit for essentially opposite behavior. Cookies’s comment about seeing what sticks is starting to resonate with me. > [@](#): > > 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: > > [Quote=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. [/quote] Sure, it’s plausible scum behavior…but it’s also plausible town behavior, isn’t it? I don’t see any of that (aside from low posting (and it’s not THAT low)) as being an actual scum tell. It’s neutral at best, but you’re treating it like a rubber stamp for scum. There’s nothing inherently scummy about building a case on someone who turns out to be town (mason in this case), but some cases look more contrived than others. This one looks shaky as hell, and I’m doubting the sincerity of it. ---
**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, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/65 "2009-01-12T23:07:13Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > Millit the Frail - you’re right, I’m not reading my own vote-counts properly. Your bandwagons were Blam and Chucara. > > Secondly, it’d be really great if the various confirmed townies who think I’m suspicious could take the time to put an actual case together. All I’ve had so far is “he seems a bit suspicious”, “I’m getting a scummy vibe”, “amrussell’s looking a bit suspect”, “his eyes are too close together and they say his mother was from out of town”. I’m perfectly happy to defend my posts, but I am going to wait until there’s a case to defend. > > On which note: Cookies, flinging stuff and seeing what sticks \*is \*what I’m doing. I read people’s posts, look at vote patterns, find stuff that I think looks odd and challenge them on it. If I had a better plan, I’d use that. Let’s remember that so far we’ve caught one (1) scum, and that was because of a slip that sharper people than you or me found to be blatantly obvious. Lacking such glaring errors, lacking (surely) any more investigators…, it’s read and challenge, read and challenge. > > And finally, > > **unvote Hockey Monkey** I believe Hawkeyeop wrote a rather detailed accusation on Day 3 when he was alive, and JSexton just posted something. I, personally, don’t find you particularly suspicious at the moment, but both of those cases were compelling. ---
**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, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/66 "2009-01-12T23:11:38Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Okay. So what do you think about the MHaye case? I’d also be willing to vote Nanook, since unlike Hal he hasn’t shown up in, like, forever. I’m certainly looking at MHaye again, and paying particular attention to the cliff-notes provided by Naf, who was quote vocal in his suspicion of MHaye. Nanook is going to be hard to build a case on, as I don’t think he’s gotten much scrutiny on what little he has said. ---
**Author:** ![JSexton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/67 "2009-01-13T00:19:36Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Two apologies for inactivity, then 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: This illustrates the main problem I have with MHaye. Most of his time is spent apologizing for not being here and promising more content. This can be a giant scum tell for a lot of people, especially those who are often known as analysts. But, and this is a big but, I gather from several comments that this is in line with normal MHaye posting. Which makes is convenient, but a null tell. > [@](#): > > 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. Though a scum MHaye has little reason to be cautious, yeah? Either he gets on a popular bandwagon on a power role, or he helps lynch a PFK. Neither of those are bad for scum MHaye, really. > [@](#): > > 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. It’s not a case that compels me to immediately vote. However, I have virtually no notes on MHaye, which is worrisome. He’s been lurking in plain sight, and even if that’s just how he plays, I’d like to see that change. I’ve got a better target today, I feel, but I’m not interested in seeing MHaye skate to endgame. I want to see him pick it up and get less wishy-washy. Note that doing so doesn’t make him town; it gives us what we need make a proper judgement. I don’t FOS in general, but if I did that’s where it would be. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/68 "2009-01-13T01:10:01Z")
My vote post for BlaM looks very messy, I agree. It stands as a testament to the truth of the saying “More haste, less speed.” I mucked it up basically because I had been thinking up until 1 hour before Dusk that I had another hour, so I was a bit more leisurely in my reading than I should have been. Both blunders were products of the time pressure, combined with a record-keeping error on my part, chasing a shiny distraction and a slip of a finger. Hal’s claim : I simply misremembered it and didn’t have time to check the facts. If I had I would have corrected my faulty memory. It’s no more sinister than that. The record-keeping error was that I had miscounted BlaM’s votes, and thought (when Special Ed voted for Hal) that the two were tied. That leads straight to the next point. The shiny distraction : The possibility that by voting for Hal I might cause the lynch of another deadite. My thought processes when I saw Special Ed’s vote bounced off the idea that he had created a tie, and what if he were right? Lynching a deadite was better than lynching a PFK, and if he was wrong all we’d lose was a vanilla, and the gain would be worth risking offing a vanilla, and I need to reword the first bit, and I need to add something at the start about the tie, and … Then the more rational part of me caught up and I realised that all I had was a “me too” vote I couldn’t support without a lot of digging I did’t have time for, and that might turn out to be wrong anyway. So I junked it until later. (It’s not later yet). The slip of the finger : I went to paste over the messed-up post but undid the text selection by lifting the Shift key a fraction of a second before lifting the Down Arrow key. (That’s post-facto reconstruction, true – but I do it more often than I’d care to admit.) Then I pasted the original analysis in again, hence the repeat. Given that it was (at that point) 12:00 midnight by my clock, I knew I had only seconds to get it in; so I didn’t preview. And people wonder why I like to take my time, review stuff carefully and place well-thought out votes? Because when I don’t, something bad happens, that’s why. I want to review Pedescribe’s analysis of my posts in more detail, but since it’s now 1am, I think I’ll go to bed instead, and do it tomorrow evening. @ JSexton : The best way to get me talking in the early-to-mid game is to ask me direct questions. (Remember Asylum Lane?) Other than that, I talk more as numbers go down. ---
**Author:** ![Almost\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@Almost\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Almost_Human)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/69 "2009-01-13T08:41:02Z")
**unvote Hockey Monkey** All the people I think are scummy turn out to be masons ☹ cookies, good luck with getting the other confirmed to vote with you - I think it’s going to be a bit like herding cats. I don’t have a real feel either way for MHaye or amrussell yet. I’m with you on the JSexton suspicions though I’m finding it hard to put my finger on why I’m suspicious of him. He hasn’t made any slips that I can see and he’s done plenty of talking, none of which was anti town. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t pro scum though. He was pretty vocal about the Blam lynch. Yes, Blam was pfk but if JSexton is scum he’d know he wasn’t on his team plus it was pretty obvious Blam was a pfk of some sort (though I’m still surprised he was an SK). So it was equally pro scum as it was pro town to get him lynched. In fact maybe more so - if Blam had been allowed to live, his continued existence would have depended on following the town’s concensus. Out of everyone involved JSexton seemed to push Blam’s lynch the hardest. He was completely focussed on killing him and didn’t entertain any doubts whatsoever. It’s the first game I’ve played with him so maybe that’s just his style but it struck me he was very certain, maybe too certain. I know the confirmed haven’t asked the rest of us to join in voting with them but if they make a case against someone else I can get on board with I’ll change my vote. As for now: \*\* vote JSexton\*\* I’ll add some actual analysis this evening but I wanted to get that in before I started work. ---
**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 13, 2009, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/70 "2009-01-13T13:27:18Z")
> [@Almost\_Human](#): > > **unvote Hockey Monkey** > > All the people I think are scummy turn out to be masons ☹ > > cookies, good luck with getting the other confirmed to vote with you - I think it’s going to be a bit like herding cats. > > I don’t have a real feel either way for MHaye or amrussell yet. > > I’m with you on the JSexton suspicions though I’m finding it hard to put my finger on why I’m suspicious of him. He hasn’t made any slips that I can see and he’s done plenty of talking, none of which was anti town. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t pro scum though. He was pretty vocal about the Blam lynch. Yes, Blam was pfk but if JSexton is scum he’d know he wasn’t on his team **plus it was pretty obvious Blam was a pfk of some sort** (though I’m still surprised he was an SK). So it was equally pro scum as it was pro town to get him lynched. In fact maybe more so - if Blam had been allowed to live, his continued existence would have depended on following the town’s concensus. > > Out of everyone involved JSexton seemed to push Blam’s lynch the hardest. He was completely focussed on killing him and didn’t entertain any doubts whatsoever. It’s the first game I’ve played with him so maybe that’s just his style but it struck me he was very certain, maybe too certain. > > I know the confirmed haven’t asked the rest of us to join in voting with them but if they make a case against someone else I can get on board with I’ll change my vote. As for now: > > \*\* > vote JSexton\*\* > > I’ll add some actual analysis this evening but I wanted to get that in before I started work. Bolded for emphasis. While it may have been obvious to him and you, it certainly wasn’t obvious to everyone else. If he hadn’t pushed the case so hard, we might have lynched Hal. And yes, that does seem to be his style, as far as I can tell. ---
**Author:** ![Almost\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@Almost\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Almost_Human)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/71 "2009-01-13T14:44:35Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Bolded for emphasis. > > While it may have been obvious to him and you, it certainly wasn’t obvious to everyone else. If he hadn’t pushed the case so hard, we might have lynched Hal. And yes, that does seem to be his style, as far as I can tell. It seemed to be clear to several people actually. I’m not sure whether the votes on Hal had anything to do with JSexton pushing the lynch or whether he simply thought Blam seemed more dangerous. I realise there could be town motivation for doing that as well as scum but either way, the lynch of Blam benefitted scum just as much as town if not more so. We got macey early and bufftabby via peeker. I think it’s made us complacent and I’m as much to blame as anyone else. We’ve got rid of two pfks who, according to your pm may well be the only ones. While there’s no doubt the pfks needed to be got rid of, it would have surely been far better for them to have been vigged (I’m assuming we’ve got one). We’ve essentially used up two Days getting rid of third parties instead of finding scum and I think JSexton may have had a hand in making sure that happened hence my vote for him. Sorry, still at work so no analysis yet - haven’t had a chance to reread. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/72 "2009-01-13T17:05:52Z")
> [@Almost\_Human](#): > > We’ve essentially used up two Days getting rid of third parties instead of finding scum and I think JSexton may have had a hand in making sure that happened hence my vote for him. I don’t think “getting rid of third parties” is an accurate description, since they were both Serial Killers. Serial Killers are basically mislynch factories anyway or nearly enough with their night kills. It’s not like we killed a survivor or miller or anything. That doesn’t change any of the rest of your post, I just wanted to throw it out there. ---
**Author:** ![JSexton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/73 "2009-01-13T18:09:46Z")
> [@Almost\_Human](#): > > It seemed to be clear to several people actually. I’m not sure whether the votes on Hal had anything to do with JSexton pushing the lynch or whether he simply thought Blam seemed more dangerous. I realise there could be town motivation for doing that as well as scum but either way, the lynch of Blam benefitted scum just as much as town if not more so. I didn’t (and still don’t) view Hal as particularly scummy, beyond lurking. Like MHaye, I want to see mroe out of him. > [@](#): > > We got macey early and bufftabby via peeker. I think it’s made us complacent and I’m as much to blame as anyone else. We’ve got rid of two pfks who, according to your pm may well be the only ones. While there’s no doubt the pfks needed to be got rid of, it would have surely been far better for them to have been vigged (I’m assuming we’ve got one). **We’ve essentially used up two Days getting rid of third parties instead of finding scum and I think JSexton may have had a hand in making sure that happened** hence my vote for him. Dude, I’m thrilled that we hit two SKs via lynch. SKs are hard to detect, as they strive to be townie during the day and can happily hunt scum with us. It’s a hard role to win with, sure, but it’s a role that shortens the length of the game and can easily tip the balance toward mafia. SKs ARE scum, and any way we kill them is good for us. Would it be better to nightkill them and lynch mafia? Sure, but you take what you can get. I’m not going for a perfect game, I’m going for a win. Basically, I bolded the part I agree with. I concede that mafia often SK-hunt in order to gain townie cred, and thus I can’t point to nailing Blam as proof of townieness. However, there is nothing anti-town about lynching a SK. Using that as a basis for a vote is ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![dotchan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@dotchan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dotchan)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/74 "2009-01-13T18:56:38Z")
I’m getting kind of irritated at that whole “let Mr. Almighty Vigilante handle it!” thing. First, we don’t even know if we have a Vigilante. Second, even if we did, this Vigilante doesn’t have some sort of magical psychic scum-hunting ability and is a double-edged sword in that respect. This isn’t the Vigilante Kills Everybody game. This is Mafia. Town should always consider the lynch their primary (if not only) weapon. Voting leaves behind data, as does arguing about who is scum and who isn’t. [color=blue] **vote Nanook** [color] Consider this my sharp pointy stick. ---
**Author:** ![dotchan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@dotchan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dotchan)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/75 "2009-01-13T18:57:39Z")
Argh, bad code. **Vote Nanook** Second verse, same as the first. ---
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/76 "2009-01-13T19:15:55Z")
> [@Total\_Lost](#): > > I think every player should vote for the person _they see as most pro-scum_. I like the vote records and the way they play a part in this game - but if every one not voting for the lynch-candidate (or the second one) is looked on with suspicion from that Day and for the rest of the game - we end up with having a Town scared of voting as they feel! I agree with you, though in that post I looked mostly at the voters that jumped from Hawk/Cookies to peeker and mentioned the others more out a sense of completion. > [@dotchan](#): > > What? Last I checked the 1/5th dead Town guy (Hawkeye) still counted towards the Town’s win condition and the Mod himself has confirmed that his win condition hasn’t changed (see [Day Three](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=499895)). > > Plus he’s the ONLY alpha redshirt that’s been killed so far, and we have no idea what’s causing the 4/5ths thing at all. Have a nice, sharp, and paranoid **FoS Natlaw** As **Cookies** already said, she had an nightly interlude and got information that they count as scum (although player win condition is the same). **Story** hasn’t explicitly told us and what he has can be explained either way. Color wise it works (movie-Ash’s own hand attacking him). So I believe the information Cookies got (though the method she got it raised my eyebrow). Anyway, I’m keeping notes of what’s claimed etc, give a yell if you want me to post it ;). ---
**Author:** ![Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc8723/32.png) [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nanook_of_the_North_Shore)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/77 "2009-01-13T19:38:16Z")
> [@brewha](#): > > Hal and Nanook are really the only two that stand out. Less than 10 posts in 4 days? They are either laying low or just not playing. To be honest, it’s mostly the latter. I mean, I’ve been following along and reading, but I’m just not feeling it. I think it’s a combination of my role and the short Days. Every time I come into the thread, I’ve missed out on a bunch of stuff. I start thinking about posting and this feeling of ennui kinda envelops me. Constanly missing the end of Days and not really being sure when the next one is going to hit doesn’t help. None of this is meant to be an excuse, since there really isn’t any excuse for the way I’ve played. If story wants to modkill me, I’ll understand. If you guys want to lynch me, I’ll understand that too. It won’t be the best choice for the Day, but we’re in a good enough place that it won’t be game breaking either. As for my lack of votes, see above mostly. I feel like every time I blink in this game the Day is over. I got lucky to be around when peeker basically admitted to being PFK and was able to vote for him. Since I’m here now, I should try and get some thoughts down in at least an attempt to be useful to town. Of the unconfirmed, amrussell and Hal have been bugging me the most so far. Amrussell for reasons other have stated before me, and much better than I could at this point. And Hal for being as bad a lurker as I have, if not worse, and also for what he posted when he came back. He basically came back to the game, and immediately claimed vanilla. Why would he do that? A vanilla claim in that situation does town no good(as opposed to when Naf asked for people to do it), and (If true) narrows the pool of targets for scum to doctor or other power role hunt in. If he’s scum on the other hand, it helps him in a way that I explained to pedescribe in another game. A lot of this game is based on instinct and gut. Don’t misunderstand me, people do a lot of analysis and similar things. But what causes them to pick the person to investigate? Sometimes it’s obvious of course, but oftentimes you end up with a situation like we’re in now, where there’s some confirmed people and a bunch of unconfirmed. It would be a Herculean task to look at all the unconfirmed, so you have to choose one or two or so. How do you decide which unconfirmed to look at? This is where gut and feel come into play. One or two of the unconfirmed are pinging you, and you look more closely at them. Maybe you find something and maybe you don’t. What does all this have to do with Hal claiming vanilla? Because the claim he made, or more specifically the way he did it, was very subtle. He just slipped it into his post. There was no real attention drawn to it. This is exactly the sort of thing that can just slip into the back of your head and influence your gut feelings or instincts without you knowing it. So now you decide to look at someone, and do some analysis. And in the back of your head, without even thinking about it, is that little vanilla claim. And you decide to look at someone else. And now the scum has you right where he wants you. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/78 "2009-01-13T19:50:12Z")
I’m not feeling the case against Nanook so much, dot. Ideas that bother or irritate are not necessarily scummy ideas. Also talking about a hypothetical vig is not necessarily the same thing as sitting back and assuming that there is a vig who will take care of everything, so why bother putting effort into the game. ---
**Author:** ![JSexton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/79 "2009-01-13T19:53:12Z")
> [@dotchan](#): > > This isn’t the Vigilante Kills Everybody game. This is Mafia. THANK YOU. > [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](#): > > To be honest, it’s mostly the latter. I mean, I’ve been following along and reading, but I’m just not feeling it. I think it’s a combination of my role and the short Days. Every time I come into the thread, I’ve missed out on a bunch of stuff. I start thinking about posting and this feeling of ennui kinda envelops me. Constantly missing the end of Days and not really being sure when the next one is going to hit doesn’t help. I snipped a bunch of decent stuff, because I want to comment on this part. We can post and strategize at night. No matter when you show up, you can contribute. Even if there’s a just a couple of posts a day, if they’re of the quality of this one, then you’re contributing. Please do so. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/80 "2009-01-13T19:57:33Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > I’m not feeling the case against Nanook so much, dot. Ideas that bother or irritate are not necessarily scummy ideas. Also talking about a hypothetical vig is not necessarily the same thing as sitting back and assuming that there is a vig who will take care of everything, so why bother putting effort into the game. Good thing I’m confirmed. Ignore the first sentence because I was apparently having a brain fart, though I stand the rest of the statement as perfectly valid random mutterings. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855.md?page=5)