# Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT SEVEN **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [January 22, 2009, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492 "2009-01-22T18:47:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/21 "2009-01-23T17:04:22Z")
> [@Almost\_Human](#): > > Zeriel I’d forgotten you were even playing. You said why don’t we start analysing but I’ve heard nothing from you since then other than to demand pictures of HM’s boobs. I’m sure her boobs are magnificent but it’d be nice to hear who you think is scum. > > I know I haven’t said much but at least I’ve made it clear who I’m suspicious of. I haven’t said much since I (correctly! I might add) decided that **MHaye** was likely scum after his PI slip two Days ago. Excuuuuuse me for taking some time to read over now that, as I said, all the obvious stuff (to me) is out of the way. I went back and looked at the voting records. I was looking for a few things–one, people who hid in the detritus (that is, people who have rarely been on a lynch vote) and two, people whose actions with regard to **MHaye** and **macey** could be construed as trying to save them. There’s not a whole lot there that hasn’t already been said, but I think my primary suspicion from the pattern is going to cause me to vote **Mr. Special Ed**. The reason I feel this way is that he voted in such a way on Day 5 as to save \*\*MHaye \*\*from the lynch, and then when \*\*MHaye \*\*was inevitable today he and MHaye voted for each other. That looks an awful lot like \*\*MHaye \*\*knowing he was going to go down (and/or miscounting the \*\*Hockey \*\*vote so that he thought he was out of saving-himself range) and voting for a fellow scum in such a way so that **Special Ed** gets a free “If I was scum why’d I hammer on \*\*MHaye \*\*and get counter-voted for it” card. In other news, I’m still against a mass claim because I think we’ve seen with \*\*BlaM \*\*and \*\*MHaye \*\*that town is still perfectly capable of finding scum/pfk without the express help of concealed power roles. Not to mention, as said before, a mass claim is nigh-worthless in a closed setup–we don’t know what to expect so we have little context for evaluating the truth value of claims, especially since Story is being cryptic about powers in much of his death color. In addition, I don’t believe that our mystery blocker (if they exist at all) should reveal, even if they are certain they blocked a killing scum and can identify said scum, until they are satisfied that said scum is last. Keeping a blocking power hidden and active, especially if they’re good enough to have had even one success, is significantly better for us than a single non-game-winning scum at this juncture. We still have at least a few Days. Due to this train of logic, I’m putting a mighty FoS on **Almost Human** who’s been, as far as my recollections go, one who keeps bringing up a mass claim favorably. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/22 "2009-01-23T17:10:43Z")
My last paragraph is in the wrong order, the FOS for AH should be before the discussion of the blocker reveal (which was brought up by **JSexton** ). To expand on that a bit, at most I think we would have four-five scum left, which is effectively 5-6 given the half-dead thing and proportion of deaths who are half-dead (giving an initial split 18 town, 7 scum, 2 pfk). If it’s five, we have four mislynches left, disregarding any potential vigilante action (which I think we can do since if we do have a vig they’re playing it cool and smart). That’s four nights in which our potential roleblocker can potentially earn us further mislynches by continuing to be savvy, and I don’t think the trade for one scum is necessarily worth it until another Day or two have passed. We’re too quick to rely on our power roles. ---
**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 23, 2009, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/23 "2009-01-23T17:18:56Z")
I’m in the middle of a massive investigation of amrussel. Until that’s done, I’m going to Vote Almost Human because I still find her suspicious. ---
**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:** [January 23, 2009, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/24 "2009-01-23T18:20:17Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > My last paragraph is in the wrong order, the FOS for AH should be before the discussion of the blocker reveal (which was brought up by **JSexton** ). > > To expand on that a bit, at most I think we would have four-five scum left, which is effectively 5-6 given the half-dead thing and proportion of deaths who are half-dead (giving an initial split 18 town, 7 scum, 2 pfk). If it’s five, we have four mislynches left, disregarding any potential vigilante action (which I think we can do since if we do have a vig they’re playing it cool and smart). That’s four nights in which our potential roleblocker can potentially earn us further mislynches by continuing to be savvy, and I don’t think the trade for one scum is necessarily worth it until another Day or two have passed. > > We’re too quick to rely on our power roles. 5 Scum left! I hope not. And if there are 5 Scum left out of 14 players that means we’ve ony 2 mislynches unless Scum are kind enough to not NightKill anyone for us or we’re lucky enough to prevent it. I think 5 Scum is a very high estimate in any case. I’m wagering 3 Scum left fully alive at most, and more likely just 2. In a 27 person set up, with at least 2 PFK, 5 seems like an abundance of Scum especially with them having a role blocker and an investigator. Also, as to my voting record. It is what is it. I did vote to lynch Macey. I know I hesitated on the MHaye lynch. I had my reasons for voting Hal. I stated them. I was wrong. I had switched briefly to MHaye the Day Hal was lynched because I thought the confirmed were trying to coordinate a lynch to prevent a Scum-induced Chaos. That plan failed miserably. If you think there’s something to my voting record, fine. That’s something I can’t change. I do think we have scummier options out there. I’ll try to a serious re-read, but I do want to qualify that if I’m not on for a few days, it’s not because I’m lurking. It’s because I have a medical issue that I need to attend to. ---
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/25 "2009-01-23T18:26:45Z")
You really confused me there, **Zeriel** , I’ve put in some corrections in bold: (On preview, like special ed said). > [@Zeriel](#): > > To expand on that a bit, at most I think we would have four-five scum **total** , which is effectively 5-6 given the half-dead thing and proportion of deaths who are half-dead (giving an initial split **20** town, **5** scum, 2 pfk). If it’s five, we have four mislynches left, disregarding any potential vigilante action (which I think we can do since if we do have a vig they’re playing it cool and smart). That’s four nights in which our potential roleblocker can potentially **prevent scum Night kills** by continuing to be savvy, and I don’t think the trade for one scum is necessarily worth it until another Day or two have passed. 14 total alive, 2 kills Day/Night, two scum alive: D7: 12/2.6, D8: 10/2.6, D9: 8/2.6, D10: 6/2.6, D11: 4/2.6 (LyLo) [QUOTE=Zeriel] We’re too quick to rely on our power roles. [/QUOTE] If it really is a role blocker (less likely than a doctor imo) that found scum, why risk losing that information? Even if a scum false claims and he tells us to lynch town, we get one scum and still have three mislynches left. ---
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/26 "2009-01-23T19:04:23Z")
And **Brewha** : you never unvoted **Nanook** , so your vote for amrussell doesn’t count. And for the **amrussell** voters who partly based it of my earlier list, I made another one assuming scum didn’t protect **MHaye** Day Six, it’s [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10728464&postcount=124), just before **Story** posted Day Seven. I’ve only reread the amrussell/JSexton post from last Day/Night (and the posts quoted). I haven’t really found a crack in amrussells case, though JSexton made another defense post. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT SIX](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-six/481695/120): > > Point 3: I think here you’re misinterpreting what I was saying. When I said it would be good to analyze those that interacted with bufftabby and macey (and those that didn’t), I’m not saying that both of those actions are automatically scum tells. All I was saying is that it’s easy to get caught up in doing a PBPA and thinking that’s all there is to it. Context is important. For example, say a player is on a “lynch the lurker” hunt, and calls out two of the three lowest posters. If it later turns out that the the missing player is scum, well, maybe that’s a good indicator that the lurker hunter is also scum, due to the failure to call the scum lurker out. That’s what I was referring to, because it’s not something that would be apparent from just searching someone’s posts. > > It’s not remotely the same as calling people scum for opposite reasons. What does PBPA for? Point Based Player Analysis? A point related to this quote **JSexton** didn’t clarify which amrussell mentioned: JSexton suggested a **macey** voter analysis, but didn’t do it himself and **Hawkeyeop** was already busy doing it. However, [the full post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10624260&postcount=36) does indicate he hadn’t read up completely yet. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/27 "2009-01-23T20:29:41Z")
This is why I shouldn’t type right before lunch. Let me redo that entire thing. Y’know what, I take it back. First of all, I miscounted some things. and second of all, I was using Rapier’s player list above and thought there were 15 alive. I think my point stands, though, that we have a potential for some good blocks left (and this is assuming it’s a blocker and not a doc). I see it as a choice between our power roles doing our (scum-finding) work for us with a lucky hit on a kill-block (again, even assuming we have a blocker) or us continuing to trust our (potential) unseen benefactor. If any townie powers have good information, they can choose when to let it out there. Special Ed, I’m not sold on your being scum, but you do have a curious set of circumstances that I don’t trust. So it goes. ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/28 "2009-01-23T20:46:52Z")
Subscribing, don’t mind me… ---
**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 23, 2009, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/29 "2009-01-23T21:30:31Z")
I looked over amrussell…a bit…it took forever. Uuhhh…he is the most analytical player _evar_ other than BalM…no offense, my mind just doesn’t process this game that way. So I didn’t learn much. Um…he’s definitely been helpful, if nothing else. And I personally think that moving votes/suspicion a lot is not particularly scummy, since opinions of scumminess can change on a phrase, or word, or claim, or even an indefinite article, and I’m not so sure we want to lock ourselves in through suspicion. He has done a _few_ suspicious things, but not enough to jump on the case. No, I’ll stick with my vote on almost human for now. ---
**Author:** ![Total\_Lost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e56c9b/32.png) [@Total\_Lost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Total_Lost)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/30 "2009-01-23T21:40:59Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > I looked over amrussell…a bit…it took forever. Uuhhh…he is the most analytical player _evar_ other than BalM…no offense, my mind just doesn’t process this game that way. So I didn’t learn much. Um…he’s definitely been helpful, if nothing else. And I personally think that moving votes/suspicion a lot is not particularly scummy, since opinions of scumminess can change on a phrase, or word, or claim, or even an indefinite article, and I’m not so sure we want to lock ourselves in through suspicion. He has done a _few_ suspicious things, but not enough to jump on the case. No, I’ll stick with my vote on almost human for now. I’m not sure if I got this right… The votes on \*\*Almost Human \*\*is based on the vote for **JSexton** (a weak case) and the suggestion that we have a vig? I’ don’t really know what to think of **Almost Human** right now - but I’m not sure I feel the scummy-vibe you do. Are we still on the voting as a block-thing? Because then we might need to look elsewhere toDay… I really would like to stay with you - but it might be time to part ☹ ---
**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 23, 2009, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/31 "2009-01-23T22:04:10Z")
All bolding is mine: > [@Millit\_the\_Frail](#): > > OK, let’s get serious toDay. I want to bust some more Deadites. I see that no one is picking up on my case against **special ed** , but I see another good candidate rising. A few players who have strong townie cred with me have put out good arguments against **amrussell**. I can buy it. **Something about his analyses has struck me as forced and smudgy.** There’s definitely a poo-flinging quality to his style, as someone mentioned, and I can’t forget how he outed **Hockey Monkey**. That whole exchange was bizarre to say the least. He commented on how various players were scummy for jumping on bandwagons (including **MHaye** ), but then he voted **Hockey Monkey** for “blending in.” Not for lurking (there were much bigger lurkers in the game to go after) or for not voting (she missed one vote, but that’s not what he’s going on about),\*\* but for being careful. What?\*\* 1. Something about them, eh? It’s a little difficult to defend against that without a bit more detail, but it does sound enough like an argument to keep suspicion on me. Don’t just keep the plate spinning, make a proper case. 2. Hockey Monkey: In one post, I listed people who I thought deserved a second look, hopefully by some other keen townies rather than me all by myself. In the next post, I made my vote. I kept that separate so that it would stand out and it would be clear that this was the person I found most suspicious. Obviously, I just confused people instead. As to the substance of the vote, I can think of one other player who missed some but not all votes, kept a low and innocuous profile and yet wasn’t a full-on lurker. As MHaye turned out to be scum, I’m not embarrassed by my reasoning _at all_, just irked that I picked the wrong target. 3. You say that I “outed” Hockey Monkey, which could be taken to imply that it was a deliberate action on my part (and ignores the role Almost Human played). If you are implying that not only am I scum, but that I knew Hockey Monkey was a mason, I’d love to hear the scum motivation for forcing a mason claim rather than just killing her off. > [@Rapier42](#): > > Just briefly now, but you could start by retracting your cases against players when they pick it apart, instead of just leaving it hanging for scum to use later. You know, like you did to me. I haven’t been able to see if thats how you left the rest of your cases, but memory sez you’ve jumping from case to case without acknowledging players defenses… thats scummy. It’s not exactly a smudge, but it serves the same purpose. There are two things at play here. The first is the time-difference. In the beginning of the game, people’s response to me would be followed by several pages of new discussion and events. It struck me that going back to something said over 50 posts ago would be more of a distraction than a step forward. (For example, after I made my case against you, the whole Blam issue exploded. Better for me to post my opinion on that than to drag the discussion back into the past.) Secondly and more importantly, I think I have a slightly different perspective on making cases than you or perhaps than most people. I view it as much more akin to an adversarial legal technique. I make my case; you defend. It’s up to other people to judge. It shouldn’t mean a damn thing if I decide that you feel town. Everyone else should be judging on the merits, not waiting for me to pronounce my opinion. In any case, if in the course of moving on with the conversation, I take my vote off somebody, it doesn’t mean that I no longer think they’re scummy. For example, my vote is currently on **JSexton**. Earlier, it was on **brewha**. _I still suspect **brewha** _. But there’s more than one scum out there, so I’m trying to keep as many people as possible under scrutiny. ---
**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 23, 2009, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/32 "2009-01-23T22:33:48Z")
Clearly I should follow up on at least one aspect of that. Here’s why I’m still suspicious of brewha: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT SIX](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-six/481695/121): > > So based on **Natlaw’s** saving Mhaye analysis, I’ve started at the top of the list to look back at posts. > > So far, I’ve gotten through one - Amrussel’s (he is at the top) > > A couple of things stand out. > > [Post 239](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10611247&postcount=239) of day one. He’s quick to shush Peeker when he mentions the disembodied hand. > > … > > I may be ‘reaching’ here (sorry sorry), but what if the evil hand were a scum role? I didn’t give it two thoughts before, but now that we find out that Mhaye was a disembodied Moose Head, it’s more believable. > So, anyway, if there’s a disembodied Moosey, there could be a disembodied hand. And either Amrussel is the hand or knows who the hand is (if this comment of his was a scum slip at all). It’s just one data point, and could or could not be complete BS - it just sticks out to me. Reaching barely begins to describe it. Allow me to quote from the evergreen colour: > [@](#): > > A pregnant pause. After a bit, the corn parts, and what is left of MACEY is ejected. _ **It is a hand** _, clawed and still gripping a wicked curved dagger. It drops the dagger, and rises up onto its stump of a wrist. It begins making a variety of gestures, frantically. A girl steps forward. > > HUMAN PLOT DEVICE > Oh! I am fluent in American Sign Language! > > STUDENT > How convenient and not at all forced! > > HUMAN PLOT DEVICE > It says we must listen carefully, that it and it alone holds the key to our salvation. It says it has important advice to share. > > All look expectantly at the hand. > > _ **The HAND OF MACEY** _ gives them all the finger. HOOPY FROOD laughs from the woodchipper. (Incredulous bolding, italicising and underlining are mine) How you could think that I or anybody else was the disembodied hand is beyond me. This really smacks of someone trying to build bricks without straw. > [@](#): > > But, the next post that stood out was [#306](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10618287&postcount=306) on day one. > > … > > I don’t know why it bugs me, but it does. He said that he didn’t think Macey was scummy. Hawkeye called him out on it in post 294, but nothing became of it. No one voted for Amrussel based on Hawkeye’s post - no one really even acknowledged it. But then, Amrussel comes out, quotes his on Macey vote dissention, and explains it. In the very post you direct people to, I quote not only myself but **two other people** who comment on how the **case against me is a strong one** , or on how I was **clearly arguing more forcefully than others**. It beggars belief that you can quote that post and then say “no-one ever really acknowledged [Hawkeye’s case against me].” \*Clearly \*people did. It’s right there. This case smacks of you trying to build a case against me and using whatever comes to hand whether it makes sense or not. It’s either delayed action OMGUS or you’re trying hard to get me lynched but don’t have any real evidence. ---
**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 23, 2009, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/33 "2009-01-23T23:05:59Z")
But there’s more! > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT SIX](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-six/481695/120): > > Point 1 I’ve talked about already. > > Point 2: Blam was the lynch I felt most strongly about. I’m not going to apologize for that. However, I’d like to note that I also attacked macey day 1 for being ridiculously scummy. I didn’t ride her as hard as Blam, because it wasn’t necessary - nobody needed convincing. Yes, of course I could have just been bussing macey, but it’s not true that the only strong attack I amde was on a SK. You say you’re playing with a toned down style. That seems fair enough. But like I said, and here we segue into point two, you reverted to form for **Blam**. By contrast, here’s the entirety of your strong attack against **macey** : > [@JSexton](#): > > Wow. It’s been said by others, but yeah. Claiming mason is not the same as any other claim, really. There’s zero chance that scum false claims mason day one. Think about it: if the mod told them there’s no mason group, that’s basically free rein to have two or three scum be unlynchable. > > This post and your others are pretty bad. I see a former mason buddy saying that you can be all over the place as town, but it’s still worth a unvote Pleonast, vote macey. It’s a vote. It’s a confident vote. But four lines is not a strong attack, especially when you’re the sixth vote. Rewriting your own posting history in the hopes that others will take you at your word is a definite scum tell. > [@](#): > > Point 3: I think here you’re misinterpreting what I was saying. When I said it would be good to analyze those that interacted with bufftabby and macey (and those that didn’t), I’m not saying that both of those actions are automatically scum tells. All I was saying is that it’s easy to get caught up in doing a PBPA and thinking that’s all there is to it. Context is important. For example, say a player is on a “lynch the lurker” hunt, and calls out two of the three lowest posters. If it later turns out that the the missing player is scum, well, maybe that’s a good indicator that the lurker hunter is also scum, due to the failure to call the scum lurker out. That’s what I was referring to, because it’s not something that would be apparent from just searching someone’s posts. > > It’s not remotely the same as calling people scum for opposite reasons. It strikes me that based on this you weren’t really saying anything. Telling people how they ought to go about hunting scum is easy; getting your hands dirty is harder. And you’ve been offering a lot more advice than you’ve been hunting scum. But the original point is that after making some clear Day One posts about not thinking “scum would never do that”, you tried to call me out for being prepared to consider that two different actions could have scum motivation. It’s not consistent. > [@](#): > > Point 4: Related to the above. I don’t think there’s any contradiction there at all. Again, it’s all about context. Regarding brewha’s vote on macey, there’s a difference between hopping on a wagon, and starting one. Brewha isn’t totally cleared in my mind, but then, no one is totally cleared in my mind. How does one decide to “start” a wagon? At the point you make the first vote, you have no idea if it’s going to be a wagon or not. First you pointed out that somebody who started a wagon like **macey** ’s would have no chance to get off, then you smear me for suggesting that **brewha** ’s early \*\*macey _vote may not be exculpatory for exactly that reason_. > [@](#): > > Which brings me to > > Point 5: What you call smudging, I call caution. The only confirmed townies are dead townies. We have someone cop-cleared? Could be godfather. We have uncountered claimed masons? One could be a traitor. I’ve lost too many games to assuming someone is 100% cleared, and I won’t hesitate to correct someone if they’re getting too casual with suspicion. Do I consider the masons and Total Lost to be very likely town? Of course. It doesn’t mean they’re unlynchable if the right evidence comes out, however. Caution is all very well and good. But you said twice that you would review **Total Lost** , and you never did. Which makes this look less like pro-town caution and more like scum sowing doubt and confusion. My vote stands. ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2009, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/34 "2009-01-23T23:44:34Z")
Oops. I forgot something Unvote Nanook ---
**Author:** ![JSexton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/35 "2009-01-24T00:51:50Z")
> [@Natlaw](#): > > What does PBPA for? Point Based Player Analysis? Post-by-post analysis. > [@](#): > > A point related to this quote **JSexton** didn’t clarify which amrussell mentioned: JSexton suggested a **macey** voter analysis, but didn’t do it himself and **Hawkeyeop** was already busy doing it. > However, [the full post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10624260&postcount=36) does indicate he hadn’t read up completely yet. That was part of it, but the rest was really just laziness. No excuse. > [@amrussell](#): > > You say you’re playing with a toned down style. That seems fair enough. But like I said, and here we segue into point two, you reverted to form for **Blam**. By contrast, here’s the entirety of your strong attack against **macey** : I already addresed this. With Blam, it took convincing to get people to see what I was seeing. With Macey, there were plenty of people in agreement, and no persuasion was required. You’re correct that it wasn’t nearly as aggressive an attack as Blam’s, but ask yourself: why would it be, given that the votes were piling on just fine? > [@](#): > > It strikes me that based on this you weren’t really saying anything. Telling people how they ought to go about hunting scum is easy; getting your hands dirty is harder. And you’ve been offering a lot more advice than you’ve been hunting scum. I guess I’ve tried to be coach this game instead of quarterback. Unsurprisingly, I’m in trouble for that too. My frustration is building rapidly. > [@](#): > > But the original point is that after making some clear Day One posts about not thinking “scum would never do that”, you tried to call me out for being prepared to consider that two different actions could have scum motivation. It’s not consistent. The problem I had with that behavior is related to the accusation of flinging poo. I felt like you were trying to look at any given person’s behavior and cast it in the worst possible light. Townies look for the truth, while scum are looking for reasons for a mislynch. Like I said before, there was a disingenuous feel to much of your analysis. > [@](#): > > How does one decide to “start” a wagon? By casting a non-throwaway vote? > [@](#): > > At the point you make the first vote, you have no idea if it’s going to be a wagon or not. First you pointed out that somebody who started a wagon like **macey** ’s would have no chance to get off, then you smear me for suggesting that **brewha** ’s early \*\*macey _vote may not be exculpatory for exactly that reason_. _sigh_ Yes, that’s a possible explanation. I’ve never said that brewha is hard town for that vote. What I have said, consistently, was that I read the attack as genuine and that it had enough behind it that it was extremely likely to lead to at least a claim, if not a lynch. Brewha is good enough to know that, at the time he made that attack, where it was going to go. > [@](#): > > Caution is all very well and good. But you said twice that you would review **Total Lost** , and you never did. Which makes this look less like pro-town caution and more like scum sowing doubt and confusion. I wasn’t inclined to do it until we knew Cookies alignment. Once she came up town (and both SKs were known), there didn’t seem much point. Is there still a slight chance of a non-deadite mafioso? Yes. Is it worth a massive review? Nope. ---
**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 24, 2009, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/36 "2009-01-24T01:12:45Z")
At Total Lost’s request, I went backed and found all the scummy things Almost Human has done, in my opinion. Here they are. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT ONE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854/13): > > I don’t think anyone’s asking for a mass roleclaim, just an ‘Alpha’ ‘Beta’ claim. I’m not sure how effective it would be but I don’t see much harm in it either. Advocates an Alpha Beta claim, because it wouldn’t do much harm. Except…if she were a power role she’d know how much harm it would do. And I would expect a townsperson to be more cautious in revealing such information. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT ONE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854/139): > > **macey** , as I and several other players have already said, out of all the power roles to claim, mason is the most risky one for a scum to pick so for now I’m believing him. > > I don’t see the purpose of trying to find out more about his role for the purposes of confirmation. Or for any other reason actually. Even if it would tell us whether or not power roles have Alpha/Beta status I don’t think it’s in our best interest for that to be public yet. > > If the scum don’t know why tell them? Now, see, this is weird. Why would AH caution against revealing power-role AlphaBeta status when she called for an AlphaBeta claim earlier? Perhaps she already knows. Perhaps the scum, having no AlphaBeta status, suspected the power roles had none either, and thus wanted to push all the vanillas claiming for easy pickings on power roles. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT ONE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854/211): > > Regarding the votes on Macey. He could be scum certainly but I’ve played with him before and I don’t think he is. Having said that he always acts scummy to me so I’ve no problems with the votes on him and as cookies (I think) pointed out, if we end up lynching town on the first Day which is generally more likely than not, at least we’re lynching one who’s acting anti town. > > Pleo/jsexton (I always want to add “blessed be he” there as that was the first game I ever read) seems to me like two good players with very different approaches to the game. Doesn’t tell me a damn thing about their allignments but I don’t see anything odd in their disagreements. > > So anyway my vote’s pretty worthless I know but I’m not particularly suspicious of any of the current candidates with votes on them currently so meh. This is a very hesitant, cautious defense of Macey. The scum would know that macey is pretty much dead by this point. But I’d expect at least some sort of effort to save him, simply because they might get an unexpected curveball. That’s exactly what this looks like–a defense that is weak, and subject to change–something that doesn’t particularly link, but it does plant the idea of confusion. It also has an element of “what the hell are you doing”, which I imagine the scum were saying to him. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT TWO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-two/478862/54): > > Sorry I haven’t been about for a couple of days folks. > > Thoughts so far. I really didn’t think macey was scum despite his play - this is a lesson to me to stop judging people based on their play style in past games - I think some people are good at it but I’m not. (makes mental note to base decisions only on logic and ignore my ignorant gut) > > Never suspected that bufftabby was scum. I can’t guess at who offed her (whether it was a town vig, serial killer or whatever) but the bloody handprint on her forehead’s interesting. You reckon we’ve got an exorcist in our midst trying to drive out the demons? > > A small thought…if almost dead scum had made votes before they died will they still count or partially count while they’re not completely dead? > > There’s been some speculation about whether or not scum would have tried to save macey yesterDay. I think after what he said they probably thought it more expedient to let him hang. bufftabby pretty much ignored the macey goings on and I wouldn’t be surprised if a few others did the same thing. > > I will do a proper reread this evening before voting as this was just done from memory. I don’t have a candidate in mind to vote for just yet which sucks. > > Please do something scummier! This always seems to be a common sentiment for scum: ‘Nobody’s acting scummy! Woe is me.’ That way, they can pointedly ignore scummy behaivor from their scum-mates without awkward questions, and later jump on the first badly worded townie statement they see with the excuse, ‘There wasn’t anything else!’ > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT TWO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-two/478862/124): > > Hawk’s theories. The thing is, he’s mentioned some of this before so I know he genuinely believes that town allowing scummy play by either side is a bad idea and needs to be stopped. He really does think that we should stop saying “scum would never do that” and punish anti town behaviour. > > But to accuse people who thought macey wasn’t scum as actively protecting him? That’s pretty weak for someone who’s thought about this so much. > > I think you’ve used an idea you truly believe in and twisted that idea to suit your purpose, which is to get town lynched. I know you’ve had plenty of time to think about it as you came up with this long before the game started so I’d have expected a much more compelling argument from you if you were really town trying to find scum. > > Re the death scene this morning. I have a theory which may be nonsense but I like it so I’m putting it in. > > I jokingly wondered if we had an exorcist earlier due to bufftabby’s having a bloody handprint on her forehead. I’m now wondering if I may have been half right and Thing Fish (the Religious Figure Having a Crisis of Faith) investigated her. It could have been part of his role that if he found scum he had to exorcise them but due to his crisis of faith both of them would die. > > Like I said, could be my imagination getting overactive but if I’m right then hawk’s saying: > > would be (if he’s scum) a lie. > > Anyway, toDay’s been hard to decide on who to vote for. I’m not convinced you’re scum hawk but you’re scummier to me than anyone else. Also, as you say, if you do turn out to be town we’ll have a lot of data points to look at afterwards. > > **vote hawkeyeop** This case is made of straw and playing cards. The first half is based on the idea that Hawkeyeop has been making a contingency plan on what happens the next time he is scum, and one of his scum buddies bites it very publicly. The second is based on her own theory, which has absolutly no supporting evidence except the Day 2 Color. Such a case would be useful to discredit someone who fingered a scum, no? > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT THREE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-three/479484/54): > > Sorry, I’ve got man 'flu so haven’t really been keeping up. > > I’m not sure whether the same terms are used here as on other boards but certainly on one board I play in vanilla simply means a player without powers and though it’s generally used to describe town it can also be used to describe generic scum. If that’s the case here then the people who’ve already claimed should say they’re vanilla town if they haven’t already done so. I noticed DBI and chucara claimed Alpha Redshirt which is one of the possible vanilla town combinations. But what if there are vanilla Alpha and Beta Redshirt scum? > > I may be way off base and probably am as I’m drugged up to the eyeballs, but if there are then NAF could well get a true read and inadvertently confirm scum as town. I think it’s far safer to simply claim town. > > Oh, and I’m not accusing either of them of doing so, just pointing out a possibility. > > I’ll make a vote early tomorrow when my head’s hopefully a bit clearer. I’m in the UK so it’ll be made long before Day ends. This digression may look innocent, but consider that one of the main reasons Chuc got lynched is because JSexton and MHaye (!) ran with her Man-Flu induced theory. It’s easy to set out some random reason for suspecting someone, then have someone else use it to push the lynch. No doubt a misguided townie will help shoulder the burden, who will promptly get the blame after it goes to hell. Look at what happened to JSexton. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT THREE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-three/479484/251): > > Though I really don’t think he [NAF] is lying but that’s just a feeling. Textbook smudge. Probably a contingency plan in case NAF didn’t end up dying. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/69): > > **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. Yup, look who’s under the gun now–JSexton, the guppy in the Chuc hand-off I talked about earlier. Her case seems to be, again, filled with air. JSexton…attacked a PFK. A lot. A scum would have no reason not to, so clearly he must be scum. Not only that, she made the claim that it was “obvious he was PFK” when _she herself_ admitted to being unsure and that she probably would have taken her vote off if she had posted during that lynch. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/71): > > 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. Here, she has taken the case that lynching a Serial killer was a mislynch because a vig could have gotten him. Horrendous logic, since we don’t know if there’s a serial killer, or if he would have targeted BlaM. Perhaps she was fishing for a vig claim? ---
**Author:** ![dotchan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9d8465/32.png) [@dotchan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dotchan)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/37 "2009-01-24T04:30:08Z")
I keep forgetting that I can’t get online while I’m at home visiting the folks unless I bring my own laptop. I’m not going to be available until Sunday evening. You kids behave yourselves while I’m gone, m’kay? 😃 ---
**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 24, 2009, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/38 "2009-01-24T14:25:59Z")
I have had my suspicions for a while, especially based on Almost Human’s motivation for continually bringing up a meaningless “me too” vote on my part as a reason to lynch me. The cases others have made have reinforced this conclusion. \*\* Unvote if I currently have a vote on someone else, (but I don’t think I do)\*\* **Vote Almost Human** ---
**Author:** ![Total\_Lost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e56c9b/32.png) [@Total\_Lost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Total_Lost)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2009, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/39 "2009-01-24T14:45:27Z")
I think **Almost Human** has been flying under my radar (being away and with the flu I didn’t really look that closely at her before). I forgot about the claim Alpha/Beta-issue and I can see your point in the case against her. **Vote Almost Human** ---
**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 24, 2009, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492/40 "2009-01-24T15:33:54Z")
That’s a pretty decent case you got there Ped. Good job. I’m not going to vote that way, for now at least, because I want to highlight someone else that I think is scum. Natlaw has been bugging me for a couple Days now, and I couldn’t quite put my finger on why. His last 2 vote analysis finally made me realize the answer. First some information, then an explanation. Within two days of each other, he posts two seperate vote analysis. The first one he posts puts himself and amrussell at the top, and me and Ed at the bottom. Then the second one, later in the same Night with no real information added in the meantime, he posts an entirely different one. Suddenly the people that were near the bottom, me and Ed, are at the top, and the people at the top, Natlaw and amrussell, have dropped down. Besides showing that vote analysis can be made to say anything you want it to if you change the parameters around, it strikes me as a situation where his scum buddies were telling him to redo it, since it outted the wrong people and/or cleared people they wanted as lynch targets. This leads into my explanation. Nat has been riding my ass off and on for several Days now, and I finally remembered what it reminded me of. The first, and so far only, game I’ve been scum in was Cecilvania. In that game, at Lylo, I was able to drive a mislynch of Hal. I did that by riding his ass for several Days straight. I drove it into people’s heads over and over that he was scum, and in the end tthey believed me and lynched him. I realize now that what I did in the beginning of the game, by not being around, actually was more damaging for what it did for scum than what it did to town. By that I mean, I gave scum an easy target. Set one scum up to be all over me, and ride it for a while, and eventually you can get town to lynch me. This is what I think Natlaw is doing. Sure, he hasn’t ended up with a vote on me at the end of the Day yet, but that isn’t strictly necessary. Little things, like “misremembering” what I said and stating the exact oppposite, changing the parameters of a vote analysis so that I look like the scummiest of the scummy, etc. Keep it up, and people start buying into what you say. **Vote Natlaw** [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-seven/482492.md?page=3)