# Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT SIX **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [January 17, 2009, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-six/481695 "2009-01-17T02:37:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 45
**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 19, 2009, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-six/481695/45 "2009-01-19T22:15:20Z")
[oog]I’ve just come back from a day of intensive ante-natal instruction, involving several diagrams and indeed photos. All I’m going to say is, that is some trippy shit right there. Tomorrow, I’m in a team away day (i.e. no posting from work) so this is the last posting session for me until c.3 hours to Dusk.)[/oog] Despite that lack of time, and only slightly worried by how little posting there’s been toDay, I’m going to take a look at **JSexton** , starting off with some of his own advice about finding scum, taken from: **Day/Night One:** > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT ONE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854/31): > > Here’s the thing. If you’re looking at two potential actions, where one has a clear townie motivation and one has a clear scum motivation, then it makes no sense to claim “well, he did the townie thing, and scum woud never do that.” Because, of course, doing the townie-er thing is reason enough. We’re in agreement up to here. Point 1: Scum will try to act townie. This is important, because I submit ahead of time that JSexton has acted somewhat townie, most especially in posts on game theory and in attacking bad ideas. But there’s more to finding scum than just realising they will act townie: > [@](#): > > So where does it make sense to say “scum would never do that”? When the decision is between inaction, and taking an action that draws attention. If a suspect takes an action that doesn’t benefit scum, and had the option to simply doing nothing (and no one would be the wiser), then **I tend to consider that a strong indicator of townieness.** So, hypothetically, if JSexton were scum, he might consider drawing some attention to himself, in order to appear more like a townie. Of course there are difficulties: > [@](#): > > Could scum manipulate that to try and clear themselves? Potentially, but it’s an incredibly risky play… [snip]… even getting to that point requires perfect play. Any slip at all in the sequence of events, or tipping your hand that you wanted people to see the event, totally nullifies it. And given that you’d be under scrutiny, it’s tough to actually play that perfectly. That puts the kibosh on that then, doesn’t it? We can clearly rule out any idea that \*\*JSexton \*\*would have considered drawing attention to himself as a way to appear as a headstrong but loyal townie rather than a conniving, skulking scum. (I know what some of you are thinking. You’re thinking, what if he not only did it, but he went out of his way to explain to people that he’d never do it? Damn, you people are cynical.) Besides, it’s not like he did anything to draw attention to himself. Aside from this, earlier: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT ONE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854/3): > > Gonna start with not-random vote: Pleonast. Why on earth would **JSexton** , who by his own reckoning has played over 50 games, ever place a vote without an explanation? He’d have to know that it’s the sort of thing that would garner attention. As indeed it did. Several people asked him about it. It was even the basis for \*\*Cookies \*\*vote on him. (Not long after, of course, \*\*bufftabby \*\*- scum - would vote for \*\*Cookies \*\*on the basis of that vote, calling it weak.) So far, this isn’t really anything. Just a faint suspicion. For the rest of the Day, \*\*JSexton \*\*is mainly concerned with pushing \*\*Pleo \*\*over his calling out of **pede** ’s slip. This is a reasonably townie thing to do, although as it turns out Pleo is not only town but gets scum killed that night. (Let’s hope he didn’t give anything away in his conversation with **JSexton**!) What’s interesting about this little chapter is **JSexton** ’s description of his own style of play: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT ONE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854/177): > > Just FYI, that’s a running joke elsewhere about being a pitbull. It’s both a strength and a weakness. I don’t let anyone go, but sometimes I get tunnel vision. Bear this in mind as we go through the remaining Days. \*\* Day/Night Two:\*\* Day Two was of course dominated by Hawkeye vs Cookies; Night Two by NAF’s claim. It started off with three dead bodies - one of them scum. Here’s JSexton’s take on that: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT TWO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-two/478862/36): > > I’d strongly suggest that everyone take the time to go back over posts that interact with macey and bufftabby…and those that notably fail to interact when they should. Two points here. One, it’s easy to suggest what people should do, and it sounds damn helpful. It’s even better though, if you do it. Secondly, note the scum behaviours we should be looking for: a) interacting with known scum and b) not interacting with known scum. Now, let me be clear: _I agree that you can’t hold scum to just one behaviour._ But I find it interesting that a player who would later have a go at me _for suggesting that more than one behaviour could be used to profile scum_ would himself have made a very similar post earlier in the game. There is a difference, of course: I attached names to my “scum tells” and attempted to show some reasoning whereas \*\*JSexton \*\*just tells us to look for scum in the north, the south, the east and to the west somewhat. In any case, it isn’t long before our pitbull gets his teeth into **Hawkeye** , who has gone back and looked at people’s interactions and non-interactions with **macey**. His [first post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10628208&postcount=91) is the beginning of what will surely be a tenacious challenge and is coupled with a vote. And there is some back and forth between the two. But here’s JSexton’s third post in this conversation: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT TWO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-two/478862/105): > > I just deleted a long reply to you, Hawkeye. I think, again, that we’re coming down to a difference in playstyle. I tend to think my way has more merit (but doesn’t everyone?) because you get to analyze as you go instead of waiting for solid results, but hey, it helps to have people looking at the same elephant from different angles. > This isn’t to say that I consider you town all of a sudden, but the main reason I was after you was because I felt your motivation for your actions was scummy. I can see a townie motive now, and that’s enough. Our pitbull has given up, because he can see a townie motive as well as the scummy one that originally had him biting down. He doesn’t consider Hawkeye town, mind you. But he’s going to unvote him. **Day/Night Four** After a quiet Day/Night Three (only four posts) we start Day Four. \*\*Cookies \*\*has posted her PM and is getting flack for capitalisation. In response to **dotchan** ’s suggestion that we do some analysis, we have this enthusiastic endorsement: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/6): > > Wait, did someone suggest _playing mafia_? Huh. Didn’t know that still happened. It’s good when a player says things like this, because you know that that player will be a font of analysis, challenges and ideas. Here’s where we start: > [@](#): > > **The one person I’m wondering about is Total Lost herself.** The way I see it, Cookies tidbit of info isn’t conclusive, in that we don’t know that the scum are comprised solely of deadites… > > So here’s what I’m thinking. After seeing Cookies PM, Total Lost thinks “Hey, if Cookies shows up dead, then I’m confirmed non-deadite, which basically = town!”, which is a pretty good position for a PFK or mafioso to be in. **I’d like to do a little review of Total Lost and see what might turn up.** It’s good when players say things like this, because you know they’re going to do a review of **Total Lost**. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/32): > > Except it doesn’t. If storyteller wanted to give Cookies knowledge that a player was town, he would have done so. “Total Lost is town-aligned.” > > He didn’t do that. He left wiggle room. Why? Two choices: > > - Story is an evil bastard mod who wants us to make the wrong decision. > - Story is a clever guy who want to make us put puzzle pieces together. > > I think it’s the latter, and I think the latter implies that Total Lost is not town. Again, warning us not to trust **Total Lost**. At this point, this could very easily be the concern of a cautious townie. At any rate, we then kill Blam and find he’s the missing PFK. That should let Total Lost off the hook, right? Well, yes and no: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FOUR](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-four/480155/262): > > Yeah, I’m a lot less worried about Total Lost now that we’ve accounted for both the SKs. Still could be some sort of nondeadite Deadite, but that’s a much smaller chance in my mind. > > However, we still have to evaluate behavior, and the way she disappeared when heeat moved off her is a little worrisome. She’s probably alright, but in the meantime, here’s a little smudge to keep you worried. This would be less suspicious if it were followed up by a review (to set those fears at rest) but _we’re still waiting for that_. Of course Day Four was a big day for **JSexton** , both in terms of posting and catching PFKs. He went after \*\*Blam \*\*hard and didn’t let go, pushing him on all his slips and refining his case until he’d pretty much nailed him. Good pitbull behaviour. That we hadn’t/haven’t seen on any other Day. And it happened to be on a PFK. The contrast between his play style on this Day and on every other Day could not be more marked. **It’s like reading a different player**. **Day/Night 5** This is an interesting Day, because it’s here I began to notice the contradictions. Not coincidentally, \*\*JSexton \*\*started interacting with me more toDay, mainly in a critical/suspicious fashion. > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/64): > > Was this supposed to be helpful? I can’t help but think of ads that pitch “Save up to 20% or more!”. .. > 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… > 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. Contrast this with “someone should look at everyone who interacted with \*\*macey \*\*and **bufftabby** , and everyone who didn’t.” There’s nothing I’m being picked up for here that \*\*JSexton \*\*hasn’t \*explicity \*condoned or promoted earlier. Except it’s scummy when I do it. Also, note that I’m becoming a target of interest. It can’t be long before we see some pitbull action, right? Around this time, I make my case against **brewha**. \*\*JSexton \*\*leaps in to knock it down. Mainly by attacking me: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/113): > > I’ve got pretty huge problems with this. AMRussell, you’ve got a distinct tendency to vilify a person for one behavior, then turn around and \*\*smudge someone with the exact opposite accusation. \*\*Earlier, you made an accusation that someone voted too hastily. Now, you’re accusing brewha based on being too cautious to vote? I don’t think your analysis of the timing here holds any water at all. Enough time passed between his unvote for Cookies and his vote for Peeker that I’m perfectly willing to believe that he re-read and decided that a vote was in order. **I’d normally consider is scummier to hop immediately from wagon to wagon**. Again: “everyone who interacted with \*\*macey \*\*and **bufftabby** , and everyone who didn’t.” Secondly, apparently scum now have _clearly defined_ behaviour we can use to identify them. This is a complete about-face on his Day One scum-hunting pep-talk. > [@](#): > > The biggest problem I have with brewha as mafia is that he’d have to have been willing to bus macey day one. That was a wagon that started strong and never let up. It’s not impossible, of course, but I’m extending him some townie cred for it. I’d need to see something an order of magnitude stronger than what you’ve got. This is what JSexton said about the \*\*macey \*\*vote on Day Two: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT TWO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-two/478862/103): > > False dilemma. Voting for Macey early on isn’t the same as conceding him. It’s not uncommon for a scumbuddy to hop on a wagon, and then watch their partner go completely unhinged, and be left with no reasonable way to move their vote. Finally there’s this: > [@Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-five/480855/171): > > MHaye is off the table for me for today, until we can test him out and comb through his claim properly. > I still read brewha as town, as outlined before. > amrussell is my first choice for lynch, but no one is feeling that. > > So, I have to vote Hal. I’m not wholly convinced, but of those with a shot to be lynched, I think he’s the best choice. Now, the timing of this vote is suspicious, because this was the beginning of the swing back to \*\*Hal \*\*which led to his lynch. But note what he says about me. Two questions: 1. Where’s my pitbull challenge? I actually made a point of engaging with **JSexton** ’s earlier criticisms, but I’ve heard nothing back. Not even the “difference in playstyles” concession that \*\*Hawkeye \*\*got. It feels like I’m just being kept on the boil. 2) **Many** people have publicly voiced suspicion of me, including two of our confirmed town. Frankly, I thought there was a good chance they’d swing my way at the last minute. But it’s certainly true that \*\*Hal \*\*is a likelier candidate at this point; even a wishy-washy vote could easily be enough to push him over the edge. For scum, why not go for him first and keep me for later? So, Because he’s talked a good game, but produced very little; Because the one exception to this is the attack on the PFK; Because he’s smudged me for following his reasoning on finding scum; Because he’s contradicted himself on brewha/macey and on what scum do and don’t do; Because he hasn’t lived up to his admitted pitbull status, but instead has smudged and hinted and even gone two Days with no vote: I’m going to: **unvote MHaye** **vote JSexton** --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-six/481695)._