# Mafia Reunion Day 5 **URL:** \ **Category:** Thread Games\ **Created:** [February 7, 2017, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271 "2017-02-07T20:22:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/361 "2017-02-10T21:30:40Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > I have plenty of posts that don’t revolve around the cultists. Attempts to paint me as a one-issue poster are smudges. Declaring something doesn’t make it so and scumminess is not a spectrum. I find your posts now regarding the cultists incredibly scummy and the strategy you advocate objectively bad for town. Looking back at other posts won’t wash away that scumminess. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/362 "2017-02-10T21:31:45Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > Maybe, but you picked an odd exchange to quote to point that out. Do you agree with Koldanar that I’ve done no scum hunting today? I thought you were replying to my post about the 3P conversation dominating the Day. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Koldanar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@Koldanar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koldanar)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/363 "2017-02-10T21:32:01Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > Well, that’s sort of my point. I think his arguments are insincere and dodgy, but all the anti-cultist crap gets in the way since I’m a cultist. I think TexCat was accusing you of voting because of the anti-cultist stuff, but that isn’t what I think. I think a cultist would stay out of it. Ah, I see. Still, I do think I rushed my own vote - it serves no purpose to have anything other than I have the impression he is such. As I told him above, I’ll gather information, and organize a well-thought vote post if I can. In other news, this is my understanding of the Prof P train - 1. Many think he’s already scummy 2. People believe Pleo investigated night 2, then voted twice Is this correct? ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/364 "2017-02-10T21:32:46Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > Maybe, but you picked an odd exchange to quote to point that out. Do you agree with Koldanar that I’ve done no scum hunting today? And no, I do not agree that you have done no scum hunting toDay. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/365 "2017-02-10T21:32:56Z")
I also believe that assuming crys and sach are telling the truth, they have handshook with at least some of their fellow cultists and I have not not noticed the silence on that subject. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/366 "2017-02-10T21:34:56Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > Huh. That’s odd. I have the opposite conclusion. I’m putting Koldanar and Inner Stickler in my ‘not a cultist’ list. It seems like a strange and dangerous stance to take. If Koldanar is a cultist and he winds up dead, that would be bad for us in a “see! they can’t be trusted!” sort of way. No. I expect the hidden cultists are all ‘cultists? uh, hey what’s that over there!?’ If they exist, I agree the hidden cultists are unlikely to be very involved in the topic. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/367 "2017-02-10T21:43:00Z")
> [@Koldanar](#): > > Ah, I see. Still, I do think I rushed my own vote - it serves no purpose to have anything other than I have the impression he is such. As I told him above, I’ll gather information, and organize a well-thought vote post if I can. > > In other news, this is my understanding of the Prof P train - > > 1. Many think he’s already scummy > 2. People believe Pleo investigated night 2, then voted twice > > Is this correct? Almost. It’s unclear if Pleo investigated N2 because near the end of the DE thread, I think it was actually N3, Pleo accuses Angel and Prof of being cultists. Some think he was laying a trap for Angel, either way it undermines the face value of his votes for Prof P as the seer. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![LightFoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e8cbc/32.png) [@LightFoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LightFoot)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/368 "2017-02-10T21:56:57Z")
Going down the list \*\* Meeko \*\* D1:skimming his 68 posts this has the most substance [spoiler] > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/169): > > Has there ever been an instance where Town has called themselves team? How can this happen, given the fundamental and immutable set-up of Mafia? I’d wager to say town not knowing they are a team, is **THE** defining attribute of Mafia. “Given” roles such as a cop and a doctor would even come after that. > > I’m saying I can’t conceive how it would be natural to even embrace the thought of “team” if you are town. Sure, you could, I guess, have a “team” of Masons of any stripe, but again, that comes from knowing the complete set, if you will. If we don’t know all that (who that) we are, we can never call us a team. > > And I think it even goes one step further. > > Most games, a vast majority of players are vanilla town. They don’t even get to know … Anything. In fact, most games, a vanilla town role goes so far as to state “just you and your abilities” or some variation thereof. … Most town players are further segregated than even just being a randomized group of people, some with extra abilities than others. … It does matter that some players are dealt extra cards than others… **Town doesn’t think as a team, in any sense, and most town players (vanillas) are subtly encouraged not to think of “team” at all.** > > Finally, if we are to find Scum (or indeed any non-town) toDay, that is on a Day One, Any Day one… Wouldn’t it need to follow that we do so due to a “Big” slip? One that is obvious? )[/spoiler] Near end of Day unvote Colby, voted Lakai ( both Town) Day2: Skimming his 50 posts Again this topic- word for word from D1 [spoiler] > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/200): > > Lest I incur your fervor over you previous ““issue”” with my postings ::: > > * * * > > Has there ever been an instance where Town has called themselves team? How can this happen, given the fundamental and immutable set-up of Mafia? I’d wager to say town not knowing they are a team, is THE defining attribute of Mafia. “Given” roles such as a cop and a doctor would even come after that. > > I’m saying I can’t conceive how it would be natural to even embrace the thought of “team” if you are town. Sure, you could, I guess, have a “team” of Masons of any stripe, but again, that comes from knowing the complete set, if you will. If we don’t know all that (who that) we are, we can never call us a team. > > And I think it even goes one step further. > > Most games, a vast majority of players are vanilla town. They don’t even get to know … Anything. In fact, most games, a vanilla town role goes so far as to state “just you and your abilities” or some variation thereof. … Most town players are further segregated than even just being a randomized group of people, some with extra abilities than others. … It does matter that some players are dealt extra cards than others… Town doesn’t think as a team, in any sense, and most town players (vanillas) are subtly encouraged not to think of “team” at all. > > Finally, if we are to find Scum (or indeed any non-town) toDay, that is on a Day One, Any Day one… Wouldn’t it need to follow that we do so due to a “Big” slip? One that is obvious? > > * * * > > I’m voting for Meeko because he took his vote off me despite being apparently quite confident that I’m scum, and admitted at the time that it was a weak move. > **You are voting me, because I’m not voting you.** 😕 > > I’ve seen this before. I’m not going to help you not sell your house, Squidward. 😃 Not sure what he was going for here but it is verbose > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/203): > > This, separate voting process forms the ‘vote record.’ > Then we assign players to enact the actual lynch with the formal voting required by the game. > > **Vote Sachertorte** > > This has the “synergy” if you can call that, of **Chronos’** voting program, AND “leash the vig”. > > **You lose me between the two, and leave me in Pingsville.** > > This is two concepts that fail spectacularly on their own, and you want to shotgun marry them. … **I’d go so far as to say, there is probably an immediate and direct, …clear and present danger? … To town, if we do this.** > > Ok, but I’m too harsh. > > The only thing this does, is sow more confusion and … Busy work… For town… While Anti-town can still collaborate with their factions… And get on false wagons to oblige your so called safeguards. > > Fair warning. > > **And now for something completely different.** > > It’s like the Haggle game I was in with OreDigger77 [IIRC] they wanted me to do something, and dressed it up real nice, and used appealing terms. However, the end result, devoid of terms only suited to helm them more, better, faster. > > End of warning. > . > . > . > **Does the multilynch, in any form, deprive town of tempo, time, and testimony?** > > Tempo: that is we lose in-game days immediately. > Time: we can’t use IRL Out of game days to reason, and actually use any and al information, of various degrees of authentic-ness > Testimony: Mod Reveals. > > **Do most victories for town come by hitting fast-forward? Or do they come from some slow to form “oops” followed,** in the respective threads **, by an "oh Damn…_Once Town sees this, they win?"_** > > I’m just saying, most games for town are downhill and over a cliff, at a normal speed… The game is unsafe at any speed… Let’s not accelerate. [/spoiler] Doesn’t have a switch, doesn’t care about them. Weighs in on the cultists, but it is not clear which side. Unvote Sach/ Vote Brewha (town) The scale of the game disenfranchises Vanilla Town (participation). Like, to a level I don’t think anyone saw coming. . D3: Skimming 13 posts Votes Khameleon No other real substance. D4: 3 posts [spoiler] > [@Mafia Reunion Day 4](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-4/778699/23): > > Have we earned the **right** to use two lynches? Note, I didn’t say the ability. I’m simply asking, if we take the risk, is there…is there a reason to do so? > . > > How can we be sure that our votes will split up that way? **Slight Ping on TL here.** > [@Mafia Reunion Day 4](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-4/778699/302): > > Oh, we are voting **Sake Squid**? > . > Meh. > . > **Vote Squid** > [@Mafia Reunion Day 4](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-4/778699/500): > > This. (re: players running out of steam in the game) [/spoiler] Voted Squid D5: So far nothing to say today yes I did skim and leave out some of the " not sure where this is going" posts If there is something specific you recall about him, since I have reviewed all Days bring it to my attention and I will likely be able to track it down. It is difficult to come to a conclusion on dear \*\* Meeko \*\* . I do find it odd that he posted word for word the same post D1 and D2 but that means nothing alone ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/369 "2017-02-10T22:02:59Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I find your posts now regarding the cultists incredibly scummy and the strategy you advocate objectively bad for town. Looking back at other posts won’t wash away that scumminess. Maybe, but if you find me “incredibly scummy” why wouldn’t you look back through the rest of my posting history for the purpose of strengthening your case against me? ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/370 "2017-02-10T22:05:25Z")
> [@Koldanar](#): > > They get lynched, and turn up town? 😃 > > Kidding aside, any lies on their part now would certainly turn everyone in the game against them. Ha! Nice. I’m catching up from last night, but keep getting waylaid. ---
**Author:** ![TexCat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/texcat/32/9041_2.png) [@TexCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TexCat)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/371 "2017-02-10T22:50:44Z")
> [@sachertorte](#): > > Well, that’s sort of my point. I think his arguments are insincere and dodgy, but all the anti-cultist crap gets in the way since I’m a cultist. I think TexCat was accusing you of voting because of the anti-cultist stuff, but that isn’t what I think. I think a cultist would stay out of it. Are you arguing that [del]scum[/del] cultists wouldn’t do that? :dubious: > [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I also believe that assuming crys and sach are telling the truth, they have handshook with at least some of their fellow cultists and I have not not noticed the silence on that subject. I believe that assuming that crys and sach are telling the truth is foolish. Sure, they might be telling some of the truth, but I’d bet the ranch that some of what they fed us is lies. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/372 "2017-02-10T23:14:28Z")
> [@LightFoot](#): > > Going down the list > \*\* Meeko \*\* > D1:skimming his 68 posts this has the most substance > ) > Near end of Day unvote Colby, voted Lakai ( both Town) > > Day2: Skimming his 50 posts > Again this topic- word for word from D1 [spoiler] > > Not sure what he was going for here but it is verbose > [/spoiler] > Doesn’t have a switch, doesn’t care about them. > Weighs in on the cultists, but it is not clear which side. > Unvote Sach/ Vote Brewha (town) > The scale of the game disenfranchises Vanilla Town (participation). Like, to a level I don’t think anyone saw coming. . > > D3: Skimming 13 posts > Votes Khameleon > No other real substance. > > D4: 3 posts [spoiler] > > (re: players running out of steam in the game) [/spoiler] > Voted Squid > D5: > So far nothing to say today > yes I did skim and leave out some of the " not sure where this is going" posts > If there is something specific you recall about him, since I have reviewed all Days bring it to my attention and I will likely be able to track it down. > > It is difficult to come to a conclusion on dear \*\* Meeko \*\* . I do find it odd that he posted word for word the same post D1 and D2 but that means nothing alone I’m glad more people are willing to do this. I’ll post mine tonight as I have less than an hour before my gap between full time job and full time dad expires. On Meeko, my take away is that he is either VT that can’t or doesn’t want to keep up OR he’s a cultists or 3P that is using his disenfranchised VT statement as cover for laying low. If he was scum I don’t think his participation level would be this low. I don’t buy a lurking scum Meeko. He likes games too much to not at least try in a game where he was assigned a role he thinks has value. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**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:** [February 10, 2017, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/373 "2017-02-10T23:29:52Z")
Meeko has definitely expressed in the past his opinion that vanilla Town is effectively a worthless role, and that he hates when he gets assigned it. I think it takes him out of the game to not be able to do things other than chat. ---
**Author:** ![HookerChemical](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/278dde/32.png) [@HookerChemical](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HookerChemical)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/374 "2017-02-10T23:58:08Z")
> [@Hawkeyeop](#): > > It also assumes there are no non-cultist 3rd parties, which I don’t think is true. You’re correct about the assumption, and I agree with your guess that it’s not true. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/375 "2017-02-11T00:10:12Z")
> [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](#): > > Meeko has definitely expressed in the past his opinion that vanilla Town is effectively a worthless role, and that he hates when he gets assigned it. I think it takes him out of the game to not be able to do things other than chat. Yeah, but the meta on Idle proved wrong, and I wouldn’t put it past Meeko to use his own meta as cover if he’s 3P by posting his disenfranchised bit and then flying low. I don’t think he’s scum so I haven’t spent much more time on him. Not that there is much more to spend time on. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![HookerChemical](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/278dde/32.png) [@HookerChemical](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HookerChemical)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/376 "2017-02-11T00:28:59Z")
> [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](#): > > So you were suspicious of him also. But because I didn’t directly reference one specific post, though I did indirectly, that means I’m somehow making something out of nothing. > > What? No, really, what? > > Is everyone else taking crazy pills? Am I losing my mind? What is this nonsense? Ender’s brief crazyposting period was limited to nonsense on believing sachertorte and not Crys. This theory makes zero sense because sachertorte laid out some breadcrumbs early and confirms Crys. That is, if one is lying, both are. Crys lying makes no sense, and sachertorte lying makes only a little more. After taking enough of a flogging for his theories being nonsense, it seems that Ender figured out why and he’s making sense again. I find his nonsense period believable because we’re two Days later and people are [still forgetting](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19990362&postcount=263) the implications of the breadcrumbs and the timing when the put together theories. But [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19947885&postcount=28) comes off was unnecessarily aggressive toward LUTHA in the first paragraph, but you go on to vote against Ender for his paranoia of LUTHA. The thing about Ender lying comes off as very weird, because it isn’t like Chronos catching brewha in a lie, it’s merely speculation on Ender’s part and I don’t get the impression Ender is trying to pass it off as anything more. ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/377 "2017-02-11T00:40:38Z")
Ok earlier this afternoon, I thought I remembered reading that sachertorte wasn’t investigating anyone in search of fellow luthas. I’m on my phone and can’t find the post now. But if I remember right, sachertorte, why aren’t you investigating? I’d be using it every night. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/378 "2017-02-11T02:09:33Z")
@Hoopy, you missed Zeriel on your D2.663 list. I’ll post a wow and my analysis in a few hours. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 6:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/379 "2017-02-11T06:26:55Z")
I can’t believe you guys have better things to do on a Friday night. Here’s the WoW and analysis on Zeriel. I often come to different conclusions than other players, so I suggest you read the posts and see what you think. D1 > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/121): > > I don’t know if I think it’s enough to vote for this early on Day One, but that’s a heck of a good catch there. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/186): > > Will it affect your mental state if I say I hate policy votes so much? > > Except for lists. I vote for anyone who makes a list, especially if it’s NAF. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/223): > > That seems somewhat asinine. Night Zero was very meta, and in a meta sense if the game’s not fair it’s not a worthwhile game. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/226): > > META, mostly: My threshold for early Day One votes is variable. My play style this time around is admittedly still adjusting, because the same things that led me to stop playing (different work environment, kid) are still in play but less so (kid is now in kindergarten, working from home more now). I’m still getting a feel for my own threshold in that regard, which is why I’m not voting yet. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/250): > > I concur and I would also consider it (because of the way I consume content on these boards, I would have missed it had it not been pointed out) tantamount to editing in that it limits the audience for what he’s saying. > > If it wasn’t kinda meta and innocuous, I’d almost be inclined to FOS it myself, but I’m still deciding how hard I want to come out. I know when I used to play I played hard and aggressive, but I also spent a lot of time watching the back 90% of games as a result. =P > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/405): > > Half and half. I think “logged in” is a poor indicator, I think “posted elsewhere but not here” is a valid indicator IF and only IF we are decided that we are lynching lurkers, and I think in general I don’t like the post count police. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/413): > > I’ve been burned a few too many times by coming out super-aggressive and I’m trying to be more laid back. The volume of posts vs. my available time is not helping the matter. =P > > That said, I think I will get on the record… > > Stop right there. In a game about information, you don’t avail yourself of free, high-quality information? > > **vote AngeloftheNorth** > > I have plenty of patience for lurkers, but this smacks of either affected naivete or unproductive unconcern. > > I do still also suspect **Colby11** , but I want to observe how they react to the ongoing ebb and flow of votes longer before I commit over there. Misphrasing MAY be a scum tell, but actively ignoring information is blatantly anti-town. > > * * * > > **Normal Phase** is in a lesser version of the same boat as **Colby11** , in my book, but he’s also proffered a reasonable explanation for his verbal confusion over what the bad guys are called singly and collectively. > > Personally, I think we all should be making an extra effort to be super clear on whether we’re talking about “scum”, “mafia”, or “wolves”. Right now it’s mostly not as important as if (for example) we get to endgame with the two scum teams imbalanced relative to each other, so let’s start forming good habits now. > > * * * > > I’m actually amused that the **Idle Claims** thing is so ingrained it’s only been mentioned in a meta sense when explaining what’s happened so far. =P > > * * * > > I’m with \*\*Plankton \*\*on the “Scum WOULD do that” thing, if “that” is "deliberately mix ‘conventional wisdom’ scum tells with ‘conventional wisdom’ town tells in order to generate as much free WIFOM as possible. Doubly so, I’d think, when we’ve got two scum teams trying to hide from each other as well as from us. > > * * * > > I’m spending a lot of time thinking about ways the two scum teams could change their play in light of the fact there are two of them, because IIRC this is the first game I’ve been in with more than one true scum team (not counting third parties, or Malazan, natch). I suggest everyone spend some cogitation time on “what would a scum do differently knowing there’s a second scum team that also needs to go” and work from there–ideally, by a later Day at least some of us will have some ideas that might match play patterns in-game that wouldn’t (by virtue of them being kept under our hats until then) be able to be gamed by scum (as I’m sure “third vote is always…” and such are). > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/474): > > On Day One? Little of each, really. It’s as much (or slightly more) to go on as the minor slips so far, IMHO, and setting up a pattern of “it’s okay to be uninformed or miss things that are handed to you” is definitely not something we should want. > > Yeah, I do, because scum do things to appear townie. And this way, you have an pre-set-up “tee hee, I was just SO OVERWHELMED that I MISSED IT” defense to a play that might otherwise be a scum tell. It wouldn’t be the weirdest gambit I’ve seen (or used). > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/636): > > Well, isn’t that all fuzzy-huggy? > > As far as I’m aware, I don’t know you from Adam and vice-versa, but if that was a reason for suspicion over and above anyone’s actual actions, this would be a lot more contentious of a first day. > > So that’s yet another anti-town behavior (especially in a game this large). You admit as much as it’s not particularly effective in post 550. Yeah, my vote stays. > > Suburban Plankton is doing some yeoman’s work on analysis, and both of his points in 541 are good catches as well. > > From my POV, it’s the third thing added in that sealed it. “Scum would never do this thing that I’ve done”. I’ve got a very knee-jerk reaction to someone trying to explain to me what scum would and wouldn’t do, since it proves approximately nothing. > > And I’m the cool hippie uncle with the backpacker guitar who smells vaguely like cigars and booze. > > Regarding this, I feel like we’re going to have some weird expectations given how just mind-bogglingly huge this game is. I am personally reading and thinking a couple of hours a day and I’m finding that it’s an effort to keep up! > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/656): > > I think anti-Town behaviors are votable in and of themselves, AND I find that people trying to justify anti-Town behavior are somewhat more often than not scummy. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/789): > > I think I may just end up coiling up for an explosion on day 3-4. I tried putting this game into the vote-order-predict-o-matic spreadsheet that’s usually given me some great results in past games, and it’s still a pile of nonsense. =P > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/790): > > What’s a Plump Udding? _ducks_ > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/791): > > In keeping with some others, I am unexpectedly going out of town this weekend after work tomorrow. I’m comfortable with my vote, and I’m going to try to keep up with reading the thread, but posting volume will likely diminish. D1 analysis: By far theDay he posts the most. It’s mostly him describing how he plays or is going to play this game, and some strategy discussion. Votes Angel for not reading the rules. Spends most of the rest of the Day defending that vote. He doesn’t directly address any of the other votes, but gives his opinion when asked. Ends Day with the vote on Angel. “This is me, I’m gonna do me. You do you.” D2 > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/60): > > I’m honestly feeling the Idle Thoughts thing that’s starting to happen here, but I’m not feeling it enough for a vote. I think he’s been VERY atypically inactive and quiet, and that worries me because I don’t think he does that whether he’s scum OR town. > > If he ends up being some kind of weird-rules 3rd Party, I’m going to have SO many I-told-you-so’s. > > _ahem_ > > I’m going to carry over my vote from Day One. Chewing through what I think the votes and vote timings mean is going to take a while. > > **vote AngeloftheNorth** > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/112): > > Hmm. Part of the “two scum teams” consideration for me is the idea that people will be able to be significantly less visible with conventional scum tells and PIS–a wolf after all can freely hunt mafia as though they’re town without ever cluttering up the voting record, which has some impact for those of us who primarily (more so on later days) hunt in the voting patterns. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/197): > > I’m on board with this plan. > > First of all, the reason it behooves us to utilize the multi-lynch as much as we can is simple–it trades “pushing us closer to mislynch” when we screw up in exchange for “we have more kills relative to scum, and we get more information from those kills”. That’s a good trade and it’s better earlier in the game–if we kill one to scum’s two (on average, discounting vig, sk’s, etc) every night, we delay mislynches and endgame, but we lose that crucial critical mass of information that pushes town faster from the early game “looking for slips and tells” phase into the mid-game “investigate the behavioral record” phase, the latter of which is usually where (in my experience) the game is won. > > To my way of thinking, we should multi-lynch as early and often as possible until we get our first scum, which in my experience usually shakes out several other likely candidates when there’s some red in the voting record. At that point we can make the strategic decision to multi or not based on available information. > > Second of all, it equally (as sach says) behooves us to try to set up the lynches in such a way as to avoid people being able to game the voting record in the guise of making sure we get two kills. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/422): > > Not to answer for anyone else but IMHO you painted a really weird WIFOM target on yourself by specifying “scumpower” rather than just “power”. > > If you’re town, it’s bizarre–scum might want to kill you to reduce the number of scumpower switches, or they might want to leave you alive in order to maintain WIFOM on the scumpower switches. > > Meanwhile, I can’t think of any particular way town benefits from knowing you have a “scum” switch as opposed to just a “switch”–IF you revealed the actual power (and I’m explicitly not saying you should have!) you might have been able to put scum in a kill vs blocker WIFOM especially if your switch blocks a power that the scum might be particularly interested in keeping active, because the other person with that switch (if town, 3P, or oppositely scum-aligned from the revealed power) would have every incentive to keep letting you and only you flip it. > > Now that you’re out of the bag this far, it changes the calculus, but not IMHO by much. Anyone better at game theory than I am want to take a crack at it? > > If you’re scum, it’s bizarre in even weirder ways and I think I hurt myself trying to figure out why you might have done it. > > If you’re lying, well, all bets are off. > > FOS Captain Klutz for giving away free previously-secret information that, as far as I can tell, doesn’t actually help town much. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/526): > > I don’t think your logic holds. In the state we’re in, a switch claim with no target attached can’t be meaningfully counterclaimed, and it seems like a very safe thing (since it’s not a 100% certainty even if we had all the info) for a scum to admit to owning “a switch”. > > Elaborate if you can, but I don’t see any reason in your reasoning to believe a switch claimer is more likely to be town. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/529): > > Wait a second. > > Okay, so not only do you want to form groups of unconfirmed people who vote as a block, but you want to do so willy-nilly based on people’s feelings? > > When the voting record is a prime source of scumhunting, thereby diluting any potential scum tells from votes among 3-4 people any one of whom may or may not be anything? > > That’s just superficially (because of your leadup with the switch nonsense) good enough and actually bad enough to merit this next move: > > **unvote AngeloftheNorth > vote paulwhoisaghost** > > There’s not a lot of good reason for scum to hunt switch holders qua switch holders, either–we already know some of those switch holders are able to block townie powers, and unless a scum faction holds the mate to a particular switch, killing one switch holder merely gives absolute power to the not-them entity that holds the other one. With no death reveal of switches, as I seem to remember being said, that is a big cup of WIFOM for scum teams to go after in lieu of hunting our power roles. > > FOS remains on CaptainKlutz for making an unforced information error, and his defense of same doesn’t hold water to me. > FOS remains on AngeloftheNorth, because of her attempt to set up a way to excuse poor play (Oh, I didn’t read the rules tee hee). > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/540): > > Excuse nothin’. I explicitly think **Idle** is more likely than many to flip PFK, I just can’t prove it enough to vote for him with any kind of a coherent case. > > This is strikingly Rovian–you accusing me of doing something that will allow me to excuse a bad decision when I have had a vote on you for exactly that same thing. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/541): > > This. I used to get voted off relatively early in games in the middle of my mafia career for playing SUPER aggressive and combative. So I stopped doing that. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/687): > > My analytic method tends to not produce good results from record analysis until we get at least one scum. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/860): > > I believe in the multilynch, and Crys75 has a hinky story with no proof whatsoever. > > **unvote paulwhoisaghost > vote Crys75** > > I will look SERIOUS askance at any one-off voters and non-voters who do not elect to move votes in such a way as to ensure we have a multi-lynch today. \*\*Sach \*\*is right–town benefits from it. D2 Analysis: Some meat here. Carries over vote on Angel from D1. At least until I propose a hairbrained plan to manipulate the game. Then his vote moves to me. He discusses being pro multilynch. He did not like Crys’s claim at all. Moves his vote off of me and onto Crys. Thinks Idle is PFK. Comments on his spreadsheet failing him this game. I think the biggest unresolved issue that he brings up on D2 other than Crys is CaptainKlutz. I had forgotten all about Captain’s switch claim. How in the world is a claimed scum switch holder still alive? Did even the scum forget about that? @Bufftabby, “honestly” got dropped in the first sentence of the first post D2. D3 > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Three](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/130): > > In all seriousness, just how many times this game are you going to claim that you can’t be scum because you did something that’s a neutral tell at best? > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Three](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/505): > > Okay, mea culpa. Work has been destroying my time this week, like “meetings running until 6:30+” every day so far. I’ll try to catch back up on Saturday. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Three](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/807): > > Ugh. Missing any time at all renders this game quickly unmanageable. > > A few brief thoughts: > **unvote > vote Idle Thoughts** > > Son, you ALWAYS melt down, and maybe it’s because the first time I saw you do the “bizarre play with loudness” thing you were scum (back in Sekham) but I cannot not see it as scummy. > > Angel’s participating, and that’s enough to make me not repeatedly vote her. > Still not particularly convinced by paulwhoisaghost. > The cases on Boozy and Diggit both look interesting. > I’m not sure I really understand the case on Prof P. He votes for Idle and provides an explanation on the players he previous suspected. It stood out to me that he says “Angel’s participating, and that’s enough to make me not repeatedly vote her.” Wow…. Low bar. Thinks the cases on Boozy and Diggit are interesting which doesn’t really give an opinion. \*\* “I’m not sure I really understand the case on Prof P.”\*\* But he doesn’t ask any questions. Just leaves it at that for D3 and N3. D4 > [@Mafia Reunion Day 4](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-4/778699/352): > > Catching up, was on unexpected work travel in the early part of the week with no opportunity. I’m hoping to have some kind of preliminary vote analysis but I’m also having trouble adapting my model to the idea of two scum teams. > [@Mafia Reunion Day 4](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-4/778699/353): > > On initial read of the day: > > I was already previously happy with both the multilynch and the Prof as a scum candidate. > > **vote Prof Pepperwinkle** D4 Analysis: Two posts. I get that real life attacks some times… but we are talking about a span of a week and only 2 posts. Both during Day, nothing at Night. Well, at least he voted. Oh, remember that bolded part about not understanding the Prof case? I guess he figured it out because here he claims he was already happy with the Prof as scum candidate. D5 > [@Zeriel](#): > > Pretty perversely, I just spent three hours with a goddamn spreadsheet trying to see if the timing of votes in addition to the finals gleaned any more information–spoiler alert, it didn’t. Day 4 MIGHT have provided some insight–had anyone switched off Boozy once it became clear we were going to have a double lynch–but that only could possibly point to **HookerChemical** as I read it, and frankly I think they switched so early that it was anyone’s vote at that time so it’s not likely to be a subtle attempt at a wolf save. > > I’ve been having trouble mustering the effort to slog through this game. The posts are moving way too damn fast for my available free time, and it has resulted in me shutting down–for which I apologize. Probably going to limit my play to 20-or-less player games in the future, though. (not being able to play at work, which I used to do in my heyday, has NOT been helping.) > > That all said, we have a solid clue today for a vote, one that I’ve like before but is only more affirmed by Pleo’s actions: vote ProfP D5 Analysis: 1 post so far, but I’m hoping he comes back. Wrap Up: He voted Angel twice. JSGoddess and Boozy voted for Angel on D1, but so did Septimus and Lakai. So D1 vote is a null tell. Vote record aside, D1 is mostly him explaining what to expect from him, which I think is a protown thing to do. It sets up expectations of you, and would bring attention on you if you aren’t behaving that way. Unfortunately he hasn’t been active enough to get a read on whether he is behaving as described. While I think it’s a protown move, I think it’s a null tell, this is the kind of play I wouldn’t hesitate to make as scum if it occurs to me. He continued her vote on D2, but switched to me because I had some hairbrained idea to reinvent the wheel and turn the game on its head. I took his logic on my idea and his argument against it as a very town play. Him moving his vote to me tells me that he either didn’t feel the Angel train was going anywhere, or was less convinced of her scumminess on D2. He did maintain a FOS, FWIW. Then he moved his vote to Crys because he didn’t believe her claim and warned against one off voters. Normally I wouldn’t find anything scummy about this in and of itself, but his main point against my idea was that it diminished the vote record. His point against one off votes was that we wouldn’t utilize the second lynch, but it also has the effect of diminishing the vote record. He maintained a FOS on me and Angel. From my perspective this is town barking up the wrong tree, everyone knows he was wrong about Angel, I know he’s wrong about me. Jury is still out on Crys. D3 he votes for Idle Thoughts and only Idle Thoughts, commenting on how Idle always explodes. So much for not diminishing the vote record. Though Zeriel was one of the players who was suspect of Idle early in the game for not behaving the way he usually does. So I think he had better reasons to vote Idle than most. When voting for Idle, Zeriel comments on not understanding the Prof P case. The thing that stood out the most on D3 was his critique of CaptainKlutz’s switch claim. I had forgotten all about that whole issue. D4 he states that he was already happy with multilynch and the case on Prof P. Though he had not stated he was happy with the case on Prof P until the time of the vote. Odd, not inherently scummy. He may have been skimming or reading and noted that the case made sense to him without actually posting. D5 his only post so far is that his spreadsheet continues to fail him and he won’t be playing in games this large again. Votes for Prof P again, based on the unmentioned merits of other peoples’ cases on Prof P. Overall I’m not seeing scum… from what little there is I am reading overwhelmed town grasping at ideas from others that he likes the sound of in absence of his own ability to keep up and participate in a more meaningful manner. Questions for Zeriel: 1. Crys got your vote on D2. Was that strictly a policy move to attempt multilynch? 2. What points on the case against Prof P do you like, dislike, don’t understand? 3. How do you feel about the cultists? You didn’t buy Crys’s hinky story, but haven’t really commented on them since. How should we handle the situation? 4. You FOS’d CaptainKlutz on D3, but haven’t even mentioned him since… did you forget the whole thing like I did? 5. Pretend for a second that you KNOW I am town, who should I be looking at? Who do you think I can trust? @CaptainKlutz, I get a twinge when I wonder why you are still alive as a claimed Scumpower switch holder. Why do you think you’ve been spared? What have you been doing with that thing? ---
**Author:** ![snfaulkner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snfaulkner/32/433_2.png) [@snfaulkner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/snfaulkner)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2017, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/380 "2017-02-11T06:37:08Z")
I’m not gonna say I have something \*better \* to do. But I am being forced into something \*other \* to do. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271.md?page=20)