# 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:** 1\ **Showing post:** 429
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2017, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271/429 "2017-02-12T12:41:35Z")
> [@LightFoot](#): > > \*\* Guiri\*\* in response to “\*What does it suggest to you? Time for a claim? Or just keeping your records up to date?” > \* > I have no intention of asking any Town power to claim at this time > > I compiled that data to see what was left out there.I thought if we knew what we are up against it \* could \* help? > our living roles know who/how they can influence o. it might help them aim. Fair enough, but to know who we’re up against, you wouldn’t need to list the town roles, unless you have a cunning plan on how they can be used. It pings. > [@paulwhoisaghost](#): > > Notice how he chose to adapt the words to be mafia themed… I suspected that he was trying to hint at his role. Maybe he forgot he already claimed VT, or maybe he was hoping everyone else would forget. Or maybe he just thought it sounded good. Yeah, I guess it’s his closing speech, but there’s no reason for town to sow confusion, or hint at another role, I think I’m leaning back to him being some sort of non-town. > [@HookerChemical](#): > > Wha? I have a few candidates for Batman, but masons and “fellow cultists?” Well, there’s the rub, why do you have a few candidates for Batman - exactly what do you hope to achieve? You say that Nanook is not a mason or wolf - why mention the mason bit? You list out a bunch of players who are either not, indicatively, or suggestively wolves, but not a single mafia lean, and not a single mention of potential or not cultists - seems like a very specific focus on votes from a very specific lens. > [@snfaulkner](#): > > \*Too \* willing? > > Like I said, I kinda think he’s town. When I looked at the vote record, pleo’s votes made it seem like he had an investigation. Then others (not sure who exactly, maybe hooker? But several ppl. I’m on my phone and lazy) did a more in depth analysis that I admit I didn’t do myself, and it nurtured and cultivated the doubt and unease I had for my vote. Here’s your original vote: > [@snfaulkner](#): > > I can’t ignore Pleonast’s double-double voting of Prof. Which is why I’m voting for him. And then your unvote references other players’ experience with him: > [@snfaulkner](#): > > Ok, so I still kinda/sorta/maybe think Prof is town from what I know of Prof from past games. I have never played a game with Pleo before, but his vote-unvote-voting of Prof twice then flip as investigator really screams that he did indeed investigate Prof. If you guys, with previous experience with Pleo, are saying that Pleo probably didn’t, then that makes my vote on Prof stupid. > > Unvote Prof. Pepperwinkle > > I do understand why people would find him scummy regardless of the Pleo predicament. Hell, I might even go back to Prof if his “last stand” is rubbish. But for now… You quote several posts: Texcat and Plumpudding say THEY would never have investigated Prof. P, sache says his personal take is that there was no investigation but it’s plausible, and Lightfoot argues the opposite? So who exactly convinced you to unvote? I note that you then hold onto the possiblity to revote someone you kinda think is town if his lean list is weak - honestly, how do you expect Prof.P.'s lean list to be after his play this entire game? > [@Plumpudding](#): > > It’s evidence of him misrepresenting his reasons for “abandoning” LtL on Giraffe, nothing more. It’s kinda difficult getting evidence for that from somewhere else than Giraffe. He’s been questioned on this several times already and I feel he’s been dodging, so I felt compelled to dig out the posts. I still haven’t gotten an answer for why he felt it necessary to add reasons for why he abandoned LtL on Giraffe, reasons that were never mentioned at the time. Somehow those reasons make LtL more viable here, I have no clue as to why, but allright, fine, I don’t care. Misrepping yourself I do care about. You misread me, I see the evidence, it’s the change from earlier, when you were reluctant to link to external sites to bring evidence about Colby and even added a disclaimer, but now you have no qualms about bringing evidence about Prof.P., a big change. And I did look up Total again, this was the exchange regarding Boozy’s slip: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/88): > > > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/57): > > > > > [@Mafia Reunion - NIGHT ZERO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-night-zero/776315/415): > > > > > > Did the Mods Clarify this or did I miss something. Do the Scum get their own boards? They must if they’re coordinating who to kill and all, or did I miss something here?[/COLOR] > > > > > > -Are you assuming that there are no Scum Boards? 😕 Did Mafia change really that much since I’ve been gone? > > > > “I can’t possibly be scum, I don’t even know if they have their own board”. I’ve seen scum try this tactic, although not quite this blatant. > > > > **Vote ToeJam** > > > > > [@Mafia Reunion - NIGHT ZERO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-night-zero/776315/229): > > > > > > So this made me think of what’s going on in the background, and why we wouldn’t be able to start yet. The only thing I can think of is setting up scum/3rd Party boards. I’m not very confident that I’ll get an answer to this, but I can’t see how it can hurt to ask if the Wolves and Mob are allowed to conspire before the game start. > > > > > > \*\* Do the Scum get to canoodle on Night Zero? \*\* > > > > This one was not as bad, but **FOS Boozahol Squid** > > I was thinking rather the same. And that is why I’d like others with their eyes on **Squid** to at least comment on **ToeJam**. As I think what they did was roughly the same mechanism. Only **ToeJam** gave me the biggest of the pings too. > > Seemed a bit too quick to sound townie. > > Looked a bit to me like some players just seemed to ignore it - after having called **Squid** on it. But that might be because those players didn’t return yet. So I would very much like to hear, if they didn’t see similarities in the actions or if they have others views on this matter than mine. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/138): > > > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/124): > > > > So **Sunny Daze** , **Ullz** - I can’t really defend myself against accusations of “too quick to sound townie” or “he posts a lot and tries to sound Townie”. I would argue that THAT is my playstyle, and regardless of if I’m Town or Scum, I would take excess measures to do it for consistencies sake. > > I would also argue that I tend to play lazier when I’m Town vs. when I’m scum, and I know the argument, “I’m really really good at playing scum” isn’t a great one- but that’s my retort to **Satch**. You pointed out on N0, I’m being a bit deferential to the players- well, it’s been a while since I’ve been on the Dope, and I know my playstyle… can be offputting. I guess I am slightly intimidated in returning to Mafia, and knowing that my excess posting can quickly take over. My goal is to avoid that (and I am no longer the mafia player of old- I simply cannot spend hours tracking stuff anymore, but rather an hour or two every few days checking in), hence the no notes and all comment. > > Actually you and Squid only left me with a ping and a tingling feeling. > > What made me wonder was, why IMO the same set of actions gave different RE-actions. So while I’d be willing to let other topics take over toDay, I will keep wondering about it - until I get a reasonable answer like I did from NormalP and Guiri-the Spanish. From the biggest of pings to a tingling feeling, once the pressure was off Boozy? Drain did a WoW on Total on D2, and I was pinged by her stirring the pot and there are quite a few interactions with or related to the known wolves: 1. Not voting Colby for the slip, alongside Bill - as Drain pointed out 2. Encouraging Boozy voters to look at ToeJam for similar behavior, then backing off from both cases entirely 3. The whole Septimus soft claim thing 4. Comments on her own playstyle but is unwilling to consider meta for other players 5. Drop in participation as noted by Drain post Septimus claim, got too much attention to early 6. D3 Follows Paul’s vote on Prof.P., avoids Squid (#871) 7. D4 vote on Diggit based partially on his vote on Thing Fish based on a list of leans with no info, her double down in #292 for his vote on Boozy 8. Her D4#169 to Paul about Prof.P being mafia and wolves wanting to kill him I’d be happy voting for any of you guys: Total, Snfaulkner, HookerChemical, Lightfoot, & Plumpudding but I realise it’s yet another one off. **Vote Total** Of the lynch contenders I’ve discussed Prof. P., don’t think Paul is scum, think sache can wait, don’t support the case on Johnny, am on the other side of the votes by SNF and Hooker, so that leaves TexCat - next to review. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-5/779271)._