Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE

[Trepa_Mayfield]

Two apologies for inactivity, then:

@MHaye

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:

@MHaye

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:

@MHaye

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