# Mafia Reunion: Day Eleven **URL:** \ **Category:** Thread Games\ **Created:** [March 21, 2017, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716 "2017-03-21T21:22:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2017, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/81 "2017-03-24T18:28:47Z")
The way I see it - we lynch Texcat. If Scum, yay. If Patsy - well she can take out scum with her death. Tomorrow we lynch another Patsy claimant…because if she is scum, then tomorrow we have the same equation. Lynch a “Patsy,” and either get another scum death or a Patsy+ scum death. We KNOW that there are 2 scum in that Patsy pool. ---
**Author:** ![sinjin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@sinjin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sinjin)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2017, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/82 "2017-03-24T21:15:03Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > The way I see it - we lynch Texcat. If Scum, yay. If Patsy - well she can take out scum with her death. Tomorrow we lynch another Patsy claimant…because if she is scum, then tomorrow we have the same equation. Lynch a “Patsy,” and either get another scum death or a Patsy+ scum death. We KNOW that there are 2 scum in that Patsy pool. This makes sense. **Vote TexCat** ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 9:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/83 "2017-03-25T09:45:43Z")
> [@Hawkeyeop](#): > > by which I mean “what the fucking fuck?” > > I agree with this interpretation… My only theory is that this is a desperate ploy from the scum to recruit the cultists to join them, but that doesn’t even make sense. > > Lets run through the numbers: > > We are at > > T-C-M > 6-2-3 > > Assuming we lynch texcat and scum kill a confirmed townie we are at 9 players tomorrow. > > T-C-M > 5-2-2 > > Now lets say I as the patsy get lynched tomorrow. I would take out scathach obviously with my kill. Mafia would kill another townie leaving us at. > > T-C-M > 3-2-1 > > So at that point the remaining mafia could combine with the cultists to force a tie. If a tie means no lynch (I don’t recall the rules on ties if there is only one lynch to occur) then the mafia could kill a townie and have numbers for the rest of the game. Still even in case, if cultists are being truthful, it seems much easier for them to just win with town. Maybe I trust Biotop’s numbers and think they need to do this, but this seems absurdly risking to me. At that point, town is down to 3 unknowns. A mislynch leads to T-C-M 2-2-1 Mafia now kill a lutha, leaving T-C-M 2-1-1 If town mislynches, mafia wins Now, if we can avoid lynching the Patsy, we instead get to T-C-M 4-2-1 With that additional town player (who is also unlynchable), there is an extra mislynch available. So it seems that mafia have decided that it is worth exposing 2 of their number in order to (they hope) take down the Patsy and deprive town of a mislynch. Incidentally, you say “Maybe I trust Biotop’s numbers and think they need to do this…” Why should you trusting Biotop’s numbers mean mafia think they need to do this? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/84 "2017-03-25T12:08:28Z")
The final scum is one of Biotop JohnnyBravo Plumpudding Raventhief Scum are hoping that their last member is sufficiently hidden, with enough ‘not-mafia’ cred (or distancing), to avoid lynching. Who of them has that cred? I think that **Plumpudding** is the last scum. He looks to have been distancing himself from mafia a lot. In Day 2 there was a bit of back and forth between **Plumpudding** and **HockeyMonkey** about **TexCat**. It started with Plumpudding’s WOW on TexCat ([68](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19929121&postcount=68)). AngeloftheNorth agrees with this TexCat analysis: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/74): > > I agree with your TexCat analysis here, primarily because she knows Colby’s syntax and started the train on him. and then Plumpudding agrees with AngeloftheNorth, basically suggesting that TexCat should have known better: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/78): > > On your other point, I agree. She knows Colby, went ahead anyway and never commented on our doubts regarding the slip, due to foot-in-mouth syndrome or whatever it is called. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/87): > > Sorry, I was referring to TexCat, not you. She knows Colby, but went ahead and voted him anyway, for what many of us felt was pretty consistent with how we know Colby. Now **HockeyMonkey** chimes in > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/108): > > I hate this here. If \*\*Colby \*\*had turned out scum we would all be hootin and hollerin and pattin ourselves on the back. I have to base my votes on the content of the game because it has been so many years since I’ve played I don’t remember how any specific players post or play as scum vs town. \*\*Colby’s \*\*posts were flat out scummy, so much so that he may have been vigged for it. (If I am interpreting the night events correctly.) Going back now and saying essentially “you should have known he was town 'cause he always posts that way” is disingenuous at best. Which continues > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/113): > > You’re misinterpreting me, or mischaracterizing what I said. This was directly aimed at TexCat, specifically. TexCat has recent experience playing with Colby. She did not address Colby-meta Day 1. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/115): > > My point stands regardless. Using meta reasons like playstyle in past games of a dead player to build a case against a living one raises my eyebrow. It doesn’t matter whether she addressed Colby-meta or not…you are. > > Using meta info to inform your suspicions on a player based on their own meta data is not in my opinion a scum tell, but using the meta data from one player to accuse another could be, especially when you have the hindsight of death info to make yourself credible. > > It’s the difference of “Hey he always plays like that, so him doing that in this game isn’t scummy” vs “Hey he always plays like that so you should have known he wasn’t scum”. On Day 1, Plumpudding had a rather unusual reaction to Guiri’s suggestion that Plumpudding should try placing a vote: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/401): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by **GuiriEnEspaña** > > [Snip] > > Votes are free, and you can change it if something better comes along. > > [and snip] > > Push as much as you want, I’m not gonna place a vote now if I don’t feel it’s a worthwhile one. If you have a problem with that, place down a vote or piss off. This reaction is way excessive. Guiri wasn’t nagging or being unpleasant, why the overreaction? On Day 1, **SunnyDaze** found a curious reason to find Plumpudding suspicious. She quotes Suburban Plankton’s WOW on Plumpudding and then says: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/920): > > This post really nags at me. **Suburban Plankton** states that he still thinks that **Colby** is scum, but he’s moving his vote anyway. He’s moving it to a person who almost certainly will not get enough votes to actually get lynched. I am new at this but the very elaborate nature of this vote move struck me as most likely to be scum trying to protect a teammate, while hiding behind numbers and statistics. > > My gut call here now is that **Colby** and **Suburban Plankton** are both scum. It wouldn’t surprise me if **Plumpudding** was too. So she thinks that Suburban Plankton and Colby are both scum. I suppose that makes sense from her perspective that the WOW was some sort elaborate ploy. But it’s not clear why she would not be surprised that Plumpudding was also scum. In Day 2, she puts a ‘vote’ on Plumpudding. She now agrees with the WOW and decides that posting without substance is a tell: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/144): > > Got it. So perhaps we should all be listing 2 votes then, to capture that second lynch? > > Vote ToeJam First lynch > Plumpudding second lynch > > Why **Plumpudding**? > > 1. Burby picked him on Day 1. I initially dismissed it as an attempt to divert attention from Colby, but I’m inclined to take another look knowing SP’s role. > 2. **Plum** posts a lot. As I run back through it, I’m not finding a lot of substance. I’m reading this as a tell. He gets my vote for our second lynch. (She later makes this a real vote ([318](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19933332&postcount=318)) and later unvotes ([508](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19934944&postcount=508))) This could be a case of scum just smudging someone, but to me it looks more like distancing. And of course Plumpudding has been on TexCat’s case the entire game. So there it is **Plumpudding** has had some interesting interactions with **HockeyMonkey** , **Guiri** , **SunnyDaze** and **TexCat**. Maybe he is just unlucky. Or it’s an attempt at distancing. ---
**Author:** ![Hawkeyeop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/958977/32.png) [@Hawkeyeop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hawkeyeop)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/85 "2017-03-25T15:57:00Z")
> [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > Incidentally, you say “Maybe I trust Biotop’s numbers and think they need to do this…” > Why should you trusting Biotop’s numbers mean mafia think they need to do this? Sorry that should be maybe they. ---
**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:** [March 25, 2017, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/86 "2017-03-25T16:18:42Z")
Klutz, that’s good stuff, but you and MHaye need to really get on record who you think the real patsy is. One of you will almost certainly be killed tonight, and we really want to lynch correctly tomorrow. ---
**Author:** ![Biotop](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biotop/32/321_2.png) [@Biotop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biotop)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/87 "2017-03-25T16:25:07Z")
\*\*MHaye \*\*has not posted at all toDay. ---
**Author:** ![NAF1138](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naf1138/32/3245_2.png) [@NAF1138](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NAF1138)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2017, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/88 "2017-03-25T18:00:33Z")
> [@Biotop](#): > > \*\*MHaye \*\*has not posted at all toDay. We are aware. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/89 "2017-03-26T01:21:46Z")
I very much hope MHaye rejoins us. ---
**Author:** ![Thing\_Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@Thing\_Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing_Fish)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 8:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/90 "2017-03-26T08:56:13Z")
I think the guy posting drunk at four in the morning should automatically win. Owwwwooooooooo! OK, I’m going, I’m going, don’t shove… ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 8:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/91 "2017-03-26T08:57:46Z")
I hope MHaye didn’t see Nanook’s departure, and decide that it would be 'fairer" for Town to also lose a player. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 8:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/92 "2017-03-26T08:58:58Z")
\*\*WOW on Scathach \*\* **Day 1** 21 Goodby Dante 22 Didn’t read Night 0 35 Criticises Biotop for being too “helpful townie” 39 Asks Biotop if there is anything worthwhile in Night 0 208 Comments on Meeko’s “Was Dante the Patsy?” 225 Patsy as a name. Also “The only reason I can see for the Patsy to claim unprompted is so investigators don’t waste their powers targetting them. Is there another advantage I’m missing?” 476 “I thought we’d already threshed out the “scum wouldn’t do that” issue.” 758 Votes TexCat for starting the Colby wagon “But tbh that post was classic colby and she’s played with him often enough to know that.” 762 Replies to TexCat 763 Minor reaction to septimus’s EMT claim 766 Another reply to TexCat, clarifying the “doubling down” 771 Reply to jsgoddess, about TexCat and doubling down 774 More clarification to to jsgoddess 781 oog 785 More clarification, this time to LightFoot 793 Another reply to TexCat Comment: Criticism of Biotop was a bit unfair. Her TexCat vote results in lots of discussion. **Day 2** 26 Comment on Colby 160 Omnibus post: - comment on win stealers - FOS jsgoddess - response to Pleonast over the criticism of Biotop - comment on third parties - still suspicious of Texcat, also the Colby voters 167, 168 gets clarification on win stealers 229 Comment on the Brewha switch plan 233 Points out problems with the Brewha switch plan 257 Another comment on the Brewha switch plan 261 Another comment on the Brewha switch plan 324 Comment on the low participation and the consequent difficulty of getting a second lynch 329 oog 337 oog 342 Requests a player list from the moderators 355 Seeks mod confirmation of Klutz’s switch questions 359 Comment on the mod’s reply 796 I’ll be away 959 Votes Chrys, is pro the double lynch. “I’m not a proponent of lynch all liars particularly” Comment Is heavily against the Brewha switch plan. I am curious about the “I’m not a proponent of lynch all liars particularly”. This looks a bit strange as lies are rarely tolerated. **Day 3** 143 is on holidays Has some problems with the cultists Thinks ToeJam is being overly defensive. Votes ToeJam (but improperly formatted) 160 Replies to LightFoot, clarifying the previous post Comment Little activity toDay (on holiday). She did in fact vote, although it was not officially counted. **Day 4** 120 omnibus post - response to Lakai, trying to understand her argument - response to HalBriston about the 2 people who voted IdleThoughts after he posted that screenshot - agrees that lynching the cultists doesn’t provide any information, I still remain pro double lynch - response to TexCat, who points out that (Non-Hostile) appears as part of Chrys’s alignment - asks Chrys why she did not confirm the other claimed cultist 177 Reply to Guiri, who asked about her holiday and whether she had caught up. Comment Another low activity Day, with no vote. Possibly interesting that both her posts include replies to mafiates **Day 5** 491 Apologises for her absence 494 Wants to revisit Chrys as sachertorte’s reveal did not indicate win-stealing or non-winstealing Comment Eve less activity toDay, again with no vote. **Day 6** 7 Asks if there is any possible reason for the cultists not to mass claim and then confirm each other 9 Reply to snfaulkner about the cultists 92 Responds to Guiri and Koldanar about her absence and her focus on the cult Also asks about the case on TexCat 95 Response to JohnnyBravo, about his case on InnerStickler. “I read it, but nothing really leaped out at me tbh” 96 Brewha gender clarification Comment Back from holiday, but still nothing of substance. Again no vote **Day 7** 206 Thinks a traditional SK role seems absurd in this setup. “But then I think the LUTHA roles seem to have too easy a wincon so what do I know.” Doubts that Cookies is a bomb, votes Cookies 207 Question to LightFoot: “What makes you pro a LUTHA claim but not mason + patsy?” 208 Question to Koldanar, asking if he also had a confirm power 214 Response to LightFoot: “Just curious since people seem to be very willing to accept LUTHA as claimed. If so then a full LUTHA/mason/patsy claim should be a good thing. I’m not particularly willing to accept LUTHA but I’m obviously in the minority.” 215 Asks Koldanar why he is trying to find scum rather than protecting his lutha teammates 226 Asks everyone to comment on her question to Koldenar 229 Again, has doubts about Koldanar’s motivations 231 Reply to snfaulkner, who asked why it bothered Scathach that Koldanar was trying to find scum. 232 “I’m super dubious of Koldanar’s claim” 234 Another reply to snfaulkner, still doubting Koldanar’s motivations 281 Pointed out that (Non-hostile) was in lutha’s reported alignment, but not in their death reveal. Cookies reveal should be interesting Comment This was the Day of Cookies runaway wagon, so the lynch was never in question. Scathach spent the Day concerned over lutha. **Day 8** 13 Votes Koldanar, because “his play doesn’t make sense as a cultist” 14 Comments in the colour of HookerChemical’s death reveal, that it sounds like it’s coming from GladOS aka Cookies 43 Decides that HookerChemical was not a residual Cookies kill 118 “But we seem to be inching closer to the point where with LUTHA and mason claims we can eliminate the scum pool for hiding in. I don’t see any point in hiding information now.” 146 Again, that HookerChemical was not a residual Cookies kill 147 Says that she is voting for Koldanar because “I think he’s straight up lying about his role.” Comment Still concerned almost exclusively with lutha. **Day 9** 16 Asks JohnnyBravo why the mass claim is the decision of the remaining power roles 124 Still didn’t really believe that Koldanar was lutha. But without a counterclaim, have to believe he’s lutha 125 “I’m also surprised Lightfoot was against the mass claim” Also, does not agree with JohnnyBravo’s case on Lightfoot 129 Votes Bufftabby following Klutz’s case Comment Scathach appears to be in favour of the mass claim **Day 10** 13 Feels stupd because she was set to vote for LightFoot toDay 22 “The patsy would be an idiot to claim right now. The only power left is the kill if lynched.” 111 Absent due to St Patrick’s Day 112 oog 114 oog 117 oog 120 oog 122 oog 130 Votes Zeriel Comment The only thing of note is the comment about the Patsy not claiming now **Overall** a scum lean. Of particular interest: Day 2 She is heavily against the Brewha switch plan. The “I’m not a proponent of lynch all liars particularly” is very strange as lies are rarely tolerated. Mafia did want to save Brewha, so this looks particularly bad. Day 9, she appeared to be in favour of the mass claim, although she didn’t actually say that: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day 9](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-9/781651/125): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by Johnny Bravo > > Lightfoot came out hard against the mass claim. As suspicious as she says I am for being pro-claim, I am equally suspicious of her for being vehemently against it. Vehement enough to twist my opinion that it would be great if scum killed each other to repeatedly characterize the sentiment as me wanting to help them win. She also tried to short-circuit the mass claim with the idea that we shouldn’t do it unless LUTHA claimed first - putting the decision into their hands rather than town. > > > > Bufftabby ignored the claim discussion altogether. > > I’m also surprised Lightfoot was against the mass claim (or at least she wanted LUTHA to claim first for reasons I still don’t entirely follow) Day 10, definitely against claiming: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day 10](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-10/782191/22): > > The patsy would be an idiot to claim right now. The only power left is the kill if lynched. Throughout she has been more concerned with lutha than finding scum. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 9:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/93 "2017-03-26T09:04:26Z")
**WOW on Hawkeyeop** **Night 0** 171 Start time? 182 Pre-game talk is unfair to scum 188 Clarification of previous post 205 More clarification **Day 1** 309 Lots of posts… 317 Omnibus post - Concern about attrition and lack of subs - Thinks that Colby’s slip was more nonsensical then scummy - Of the Colby voters, finds HockeyMonkey’s the most suspicious - Didn’t like Colby’s defence. “This read to me as scum annoyed they got voted for a stupid reason.” - Comment on how the Wizard role could play 321 Comments on the dilemma of discussing scum strategy 349 Withdraw HockeyMonkey suspicion after she explains 350 Votes Colby, after a lacklustre defence Comment: Nothing of particular note **Day 2** 409 omnibus post, apologises for absence - Understands ToeJam’s absences, given his own difficulties - Does not like IdleThoughts’s reason for voting ToeJam - Does not really have a problem with the Colby voters - Thinks that multilynch is good for town - a comment on the size of the game 512 Thinks that Brewha’s switch reveal makes him mostly confirmed town 518 Clarifies what he means by 3 town switches 519 Doubts that every role has a switch 573 Does not believe that third parties must be lynched asap, but wants more info from Chrys 803 Votes Chrys, thinking that her actions were not consisten with her role Is also happy with a Brewha lynch and will switch if needed 811 Response to paulwhoisaghost about Chrys’s actions Clarifies his Brewha stance, again says he is okay with a double lynch Comment Looks solid. He was happy to lynch Brewha, although he didn’t actually vote for him **Day 3** 139 Thinks that the cultists being a scum ploy is unlikely, and hunting for scum takes priority Does not find the ToeJam case particularly compelling 758 Votes IdleThoughts over his odd playstyle Is leaning toward the ToeJam claim being a lie Will look at MHaye 761 Summary of MHaye 896 Doubts that IdleThoughts will get modkilled 900 Thinks that posting a screenshot is against the spirit of the game Comment Looks solid, although a long absence during the Day **Day 4** 47 Thinks that the vig may have gone after ToeJam Is still happy with a double lynch Expects that the scum would have divided their votes on the 3 Day 1 suspects (since they were all town) Asks Chrys if she ever investigated sachertorte 123 Asks Chrys why she did not investigate sachertorte 320 Vote Boozy. Presents a different case 341 Response to Boozy 351 Response to Pleonast about thinking about scum (part of the reason for Hawk’s vote on Boozy) 377 Response to paulwhoisaghost, about town having switch info that scum doesn’t have 427 Disagrees with Prof. P’s views on third parties Comment Looks solid again. I liked that he had a different case on Boozy **Day 5** 6 Votes Prof P. No reason given 148 Does not think lutha is a scum ploy, but thinks there is more to them. Happy to lynch a lutha toMorrow 211 Responds to Prof P. with “the detective voting for you twice in a row is more than enough to earn a vote” 215 Points out that scum can vote for each other, so be wary of arguments that a player can’t be a wolf because he voted for a wolf at a key point 219 Responds to paulwhoisaghost about scum bussing each other. Agrees that bussing is less effective in this game 240 FOS snfaulkner for his unvote of Prof P 274 “Fishing is only bad if it outs town power roles. Nothing wrong with questioning confirmed third parties on their activities.” 275 Clarification of fishing and third parties and that it mainly helps town 325 Agrees with sachertorte’s analysis, but still has doubts over how many there are and whether they have a non-exclusive win 331 Explains why he thinks lutha may have lied over how many of them they are. Doubts they are scum 355 Minor comment on cult/scum alignment analysis 401 Thanks paulwhoisaghost for his WOW on Zeriel. Agrees with his non-scum assessment 470 Asks Chrys what a “First Deacon” is 485 Follow up to his previous post Comment Pretty solid again **Day 6** 162 Votes HalBriston for no action and a question about scum logistics, something Boozy did too 170 Responds to Guiri WOW on him 192 Review of TexCat. Conclusion “Texcat is definitely scum. Also definitely town. Possibly third party.” 193 Responds to Guiri again (regarding his WOW on Hawkeyeop) 346 Asks Cookies if she had any prior knowledge of lutha Comment The vote on HalBriston is interesting. He was not looking a likely lynchee, so this may have been safe bussing. Guiri did a WOW on Hawkeyeop just after this vote (although it was prompted by LightFoot’s suspicions). **Day 7** 62 Explains his question to Cookies at the end of Night 6 64 Thinks it is too early for a mass claim 69 Votes Cookies 78 Explains why he thought Koldanar didn’t previously mention he had a SK switch 200 “An unknowable bomb mechanic is poor game design (as opposed to Patsy, which is a known bomb and perfectly fine)” 257 Is happy with the timings of the lutha claims Would prefer to win without lutha, as they may be lying about their win condition 384 Is happy to use meta data to evaluate role claims Comment Looks solid. Interesting that he mentions Patsy **Day 8** 44 Responds to JohnnyBravo, saying that he is town, not a cultist 50 Comments on the choice of Night kill Agrees that high volume posters who have not been killed should be under greater scrutiny Reponds to JohnnyBravo about his claim 55 Responds to LightFoot over Hawkeyeop’s statement that “It implies that right now scum is more concerned with cultists and perhaps each other than they are with town. Probably means we aren’t currently leading.” 71 Thanks JohnnyBravo for his response over the scum killing high volume posters 171 Is neutral on the Cygnus lynch: he could well be overwhelmed, but his defence is weak Is not prepared to vote for JohnnyBravo (the train against him seems weak) Will probably end up with a one-off vote 174 Says that for a mass claim to work, the remaining cultists need to claim as well 176 Votes Koldanar. “I don’t think he is lying about being a cultist, but I do think he is lying about something.” Comment The main point of interest is his thoughts on the mass claim **Day 9** 36 Responds to LightFoot’s doubts over snfaulkner’s claim Thinks that the mass claim discussion is ended, as lutha have still not claimed 40 “What Texcat said. I’m a bit dubious of how hard you [JohnnyBravo] are pushing this mass claim.” 50 Responds to JohnnyBravo over his previous post Reponds to LightFoot again, over going with your gut when you can’t come up with a tangible reason. Another response to LightFoot, on how countering the Patsy is a bad play 68 Responds to sinjin “If anything, your claim makes me feel even stronger that Koldanar is a Cultist” 71 Responds to TexCat over Koldanar’s claim 145 Is concerned about the Bufftabby wagon Votes for JohnnyBravo over his ferocious push for the mass claim 198 Does not think a claim will help right now as we are about to lynch Bufftabby 203 No need to worry about it toDay if it provides no immediate use to town and provides information to scum Comment He is very concerned over the strong push for the mass claim. He thinks that lutha need to also claim. After everyone else has claimed he still disagrees with the Patsy claiming, as the lynch is decided **Day 10** 60 Responds to sinjin’s vote for him, regarding PIS about lutha 69 More response to sinjin 102 Finds something to investigate in the vote records 104 Says that he is looking at Raventhief first 125 Gives his Raventhief analysis 126 Leans town on Raventhief 134 Votes TexCat: “Of our two main contenders, definitely the one I’m more suspicious of.” 158 A word to the mods over participation and the length of the game **Overall** a solid town lean. Of particular interest: Day 6 He votes for HalBriston. Right after, Guiri does a WOW on Hawkeyeop, although it was prompted by LightFoot’s suspicions. Still, the timing is interesting. In regard to the mass claim: Day 7 was too early Day 8, Says that for a mass claim to work, the remaining cultists need to claim as well Start of Day 9, Thinks that the mass claim discussion is ended, as lutha have still not claimed Late on Day 9, with the other roles claimed, he still did not think the Patsy needed to claim as the lynch was decided. Day 10, he stayed away from any claim discussion ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 9:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/94 "2017-03-26T09:06:37Z")
So there it is: **Hawkeyeop** is the Patsy, **Scathach** and **TexCat** are mafia. After that, it’s **Plumpudding** for the win ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/95 "2017-03-26T12:22:26Z")
> [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > I hope MHaye didn’t see Nanook’s departure, and decide that it would be 'fairer" for Town to also lose a player. I wouldn’t do that. We’re supposed to be trying to lynch the lot of em. I was a bit sad that Nanook was the last Wolf, as losing by having the last player modkilled / withdrawn was a sad way to go, but I’m not going to throw away the advantage gained like that. No, the problem I have had is that every time I sit down and open the game thread now, my brain insists that the Mafia are trying to fake us out by making three false claims, a hypothesis that I examine every time, even though I come to the conclusion that they can’t get the necessary mislynches to win every time. It’s wasted an awful lot of my game time. My apologies. So, who do I think are the false claimants? I said Yesterday (I think) that I have always had a suspicion of TexCat, (based on tone, although I may not have said that) but that wasn’t enough to vote because I might be harbouring a grudge harking back to the Arkham Returned game. (Also, of course, that is totally subjective.) At this point, I can afford to be a bit subjective, because we know that two out of the three candidates must be Mafia. There is also Texcat’s plan to bomb someone in the unclaimed pool. That felt to me like someone who was making things up on the spot. So. **Vote Texcat**. I’m not sure who the other Mafiate is in the group of three. Hawkeyeop’s claim made me twitch slightly, because of the way he worded the last line. He claimed in [post=20087693]post 43[/]post]. Rather than saying “I am the Patsy” he phrased it as “I am Patsy” as if it were the character’s role name (instead of role title). On the other hand, Scathach came in significantly later, so I’m a bit worried that that was an attempt to muddy the waters a bit before claiming. Sorry (again) for the long delay in posting. I’ll see you all after lunch. ---
**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:** [March 26, 2017, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/96 "2017-03-26T12:26:23Z")
I’m glad you posted! Losing another townie to a modkill might’ve been the end for us. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/97 "2017-03-26T12:48:14Z")
> [@MHaye](#): > > I’m not sure who the other Mafiate is in the group of three. Hawkeyeop’s claim made me twitch slightly, because of the way he worded the last line. He claimed in [post=20087693]post 43[/]post]. Rather than saying “I am the Patsy” he phrased it as “I am Patsy” as if it were the character’s role name (instead of role title). Yes, I noticed that too. My initial thought was that he had slipped, and was using TexCat’s pet name for the role. But when I looked at all his posts I found that he is a bit careless with grammar, and I even noticed an earlier post where he referred to the role as simply Patsy. From Day 7: > [@Mafia Reunion: Day Seven](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-seven/780419/203): > > An unknowable bomb mechanic is poor game design (as opposed to Patsy, which is a known bomb and perfectly fine) and I don’t think we have poor game designers. So unless someone comes out with concrete information related to it, I’m not going to give it any further thought. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/98 "2017-03-26T12:53:48Z")
By the way, I’m going to bed soon, and I will probably miss the end of Day (as usual). I’ll check back in about half an hour, but then I’ll be done for the Day. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Klutz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captain_klutz/32/4993_2.png) [@Captain\_Klutz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Klutz)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/99 "2017-03-26T13:59:09Z")
One final thing: when I saw that potential slip from **Hawkeyeop** I was expecting to find that **Scathach** was the Patsy. However, after doing the 2 WOWs I was totally convinced otherwise. I would be utterly shocked if it turned out that **Hawkeyop** was scum. Okay, I’m done for now. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2017, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716/100 "2017-03-26T14:27:15Z")
Two things. 1. Arrrgh! Where did that extra square bracket come from? > [@MHaye](#): > > I’m not sure who the other Mafiate is in the group of three. Hawkeyeop’s claim made me twitch slightly, because of the way he worded the last line. He claimed in [post=20087693]post 43[/post]. Rather than saying “I am the Patsy” he phrased it as “I am Patsy” as if it were the character’s role name (instead of role title). > > On the other hand, Scathach came in significantly later, so I’m a bit worried that that was an attempt to muddy the waters a bit before claiming. Apologies again. I was a bit late for lunch, and failed to preview before posting. Anyway, the link has been restored by deleting the unwanted square bracket. > [@Captain\_Klutz](#): > > Yes, I noticed that too. My initial thought was that he had slipped, and was using TexCat’s pet name for the role. But when I looked at all his posts I found that he is a bit careless with grammar, and I even noticed an earlier post where he referred to the role as simply Patsy. From Day 7: That’s good to know. Thanks for the digging. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-eleven/782716.md?page=6)