# Mafia Reunion - Day One **URL:** \ **Category:** Thread Games\ **Created:** [January 7, 2017, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577 "2017-01-07T22:01:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 50
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/981 "2017-01-14T11:37:47Z")
Meanwhile, we’re coming up on final hours and I don’t have strong suspicion of anyone. **Unvote** **Vote AngeloftheNorth** This is only a vague hunch. I usually get a strong Town sense from Townie Angel early in the Game, but not toDay. ---
**Author:** ![Khameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dec6dc/32.png) [@Khameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khameleon)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/982 "2017-01-14T11:45:52Z")
I see that I got the wording wrong with Colby’s “your” (I said "their) team thing (I didn’t go back and check it as I thought it was more important to post something). However my point is still the same. ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 12:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/983 "2017-01-14T12:17:15Z")
> [@Scathach](#): > > Just because she pointed out colby’s “scum slip”. But tbh that post was classic colby and she’s played with him often enough to know that. > [@Scathach](#): > > I didn’t say it was a shitty D1 vote. Ordinarily it would be an excellent D1 vote. I completely see how it looks like a scum slip. This is getting tiresome, can you or anyone post a single example of a Colby scum slip when he was town? Having a weird turn of phrase, or posting in tongues is not the same thing. What would make you vote Colby? > [@TexCat](#): > > ??? If you are “far more suspicious” of something else, perhaps you should vote there. > [@jsgoddess](#): > > You voted for TexCat. Then you said you’re far more suspicious of those who double down on a shitty Day 1 vote. Is this intentional? I thought she was clearly comparing suspicion of septimus for unvoting to suspicion of those who doubled down on their vote on Colby, finding the latter group far more suspicious… ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/984 "2017-01-14T12:31:17Z")
> [@Plumpudding](#): > > I’m sure there’s other examples, I just did a quick check: [HoH3 - Day 1](http://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=42095), [HoH3 Night 1](http://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=42113) (Colby is playing as Naruto), [Lords and Ladies Day 1](http://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=41967), [Lords and Ladies Night 1](http://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=41988)… > > I’m not sure how comfortable I am posting this, but here you go. That was fast! Thanks; I’m not seeing a similarilty, these are two games where Colby was lynched as town, in the second one someone misunderstood a post, someone voted him for few posts of substance, but later Colby gained votes for voting another player for weird phrasing, so no, not seeing it here. Wasn’t he scum in the last game over there? ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/985 "2017-01-14T13:17:26Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > \*\*Unless someone can explain exactly what sort of mental lapse would lead a Scum to post like that, I think Colby is more likely than average _to be Town_! The color was: “There were at least 36 bullet holes and some serious burns and something that seemed suspiciously like teeth marks.” Colby’s first sentence referred to town, third party and non-town factions: "It is apparent that based off the color from Night 0 and Day 1,we have 36 townies, 4 3rd parties, and 14 non-town players. " He had not read the roles yet, but was happy to associate the 36 bullet holes to Town. “I think the fire is probably from the other team, or an arsonist. We do have 2 sets of scum in this game, so it’s safe to assume that each get a kill.” He makes NO mention of the teeth marks - he probably is a wolf and assumes that’s their sign, so he deduces that since both scum teams have a kill, the burn marks belong to the other scum team. He leaves open the option that it’s an, presumably third party, arsonist, but he points out that both scum teams have a kill so the burns should be the other scum team. Now why he’d phrase it that way in the game thread I’ve no idea but his explanation that he meant the “non-town team” holds no water. ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/986 "2017-01-14T13:34:40Z")
> [@Drain\_Bead](#): > > What about that strategy is inherently scummy, though? I can easily see a Townie Colby doing the same thing. “We’ll just go down to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for all of this to blow over.” Should he be more vociferously defending himself? How would one do that? He explained what he meant when he used those words. What else is there? What else is there? Roll over and die? There are over 40 players not voting him, and countless players defending him based on past history. If he’s town he can share his thoughts on other players, and keep playing the game for as long as he’s alive - at least we’ll know it was an honest attempt and hey, maybe he’ll find a scumbag of two. ---
**Author:** ![Lakai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9de0a6/32.png) [@Lakai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lakai)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/987 "2017-01-14T13:36:25Z")
> [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > Fire was referring to Dante having burns, did you even read his post? This is worse that Septimus’ unvote - jumping on a bandwagon “This is pretty good reason to start a lynching mob”, getting a little pressure for lack of participation, and then cold feet. > > So, not for the lynch mob, not for the lack of participation, but for the vote and then pressured poorly reasoned unvote, and, worst of all, is there absolutely zero reason for voting toejam? Even a hint of a suspicion? What up? Just because he’s next is the vote count? > > Still strongly suspect Colby, Toejam to a lesser extent, but this tips the scale > **unvote Colby** > **vote Lakai** What’s with all the questions **GuiriEnEspaña**? Can’t make definitive statements? Don’t want to be pinned down to a position? Possibly a scum move by casting suspicion everywhere just to see what sticks? ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/988 "2017-01-14T13:42:04Z")
> [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](#): > > I agree about non-exclusive third party claiming now. The issue of course is how to know that they actually ARE non-exclusive? Posting a role PM would be a start, then evaluating their wincon, the seeing if their play matches their claim - but after that if we’re unsure, they’re target practice for the vig on slow days. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/989 "2017-01-14T13:43:03Z")
> [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > The color was: > > “There were at least 36 bullet holes and some serious burns and something that seemed suspiciously like teeth marks.” > > Colby’s first sentence referred to town, third party and non-town factions: > > "It is apparent that based off the color from Night 0 and Day 1,we have 36 townies, 4 3rd parties, and 14 non-town players. " > > He had not read the roles yet, but was happy to associate the 36 bullet holes to Town. > > “I think the fire is probably from the other team, or an arsonist. We do have 2 sets of scum in this game, so it’s safe to assume that each get a kill.” > > He makes NO mention of the teeth marks - he probably is a wolf and assumes that’s their sign, so he deduces that since both scum teams have a kill, the burn marks belong to the other scum team. He leaves open the option that it’s an, presumably third party, arsonist, but he points out that both scum teams have a kill so the burns should be the other scum team. Now why he’d phrase it that way in the game thread I’ve no idea but his explanation that he meant the “non-town team” holds no water. This is the best analysis of the “slip” I’ve seen. I’m still not sure I agree with it, but it’s better than saying it’s solely for the use of the words “the other team”. The funny thing is, I can still see a Town Colby making this mistake. Everyone knows the teeth are from wolves, so no need to mention it. I mean, what janky kind of Mafia chews their victims to death? What’s odd is the assumption that the bullet holes are from Town. While the numbers add up from the perspective of game balance, IIRC we only have one vig, not 36. Bullets should be from the Mafia, not town. I can’t tell if the bullets being town-sourced is actually what Colby was initially trying to get across or if you’re putting words in his mouth here. My initial assumption, and I’d wager a guess that it’s one shared by most of us, was that the bullets were Mafia. In fact, the idea that the bullets were Town is pretty preposterous, to the point where I can’t imagine a player actually thinking that. The fire is what’s curious. I assumed third party or just some interesting color, kind of like a Mafia attempt to burn a corpse to make identification more difficult. So I guess the argument here hinges on whether or not Colby thought the bullets came from Town. If that was what he truly thought, then the slip argument has some merit. Are any of the rest of you willing to tell us that you read the color in the same way (teeth are Wolves, bullets are Town, fire either Mafia or third party)? As an aside, if Colby is really a Wolf, his team strategy seems to be to bus the fuck out of him, because his most recent behavior seems to be inviting the lynch, so that we get as little information on literally anyone else in the thread as possible. I’ve personally used this strategy before as Scum to fairly great success. If Colby is Town, my suspicions will be on the two posters ( I’m on my phone right now and can’t remember who they were, which is kind of the point) who had early “Hey, that looks suspicious” posts without voting. If he’s a Wolf, I’d bet a majority of the rest of their group is voting for him by end of Day, to try to get that sweet, sweet Townie cred. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/990 "2017-01-14T13:43:36Z")
> [@Lakai](#): > > What’s with all the questions **GuiriEnEspaña**? Can’t make definitive statements? Don’t want to be pinned down to a position? Possibly a scum move by casting suspicion everywhere just to see what sticks? Am I bothering you? Making you squirm a little? Your unvote was BS and your new vote is hollow, what’s up? ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/991 "2017-01-14T13:55:10Z")
@Drain, it was surmised in N0: > [@Mafia Reunion - NIGHT ZERO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-night-zero/776315/66): > > In addition, the number 37 is interesting. 37 is not 41. And 4 “Third party Roles”… seems about fair for a game this size. We could be looking at 14 Scum, 37 Townies, and 4 3rd Party Roles. > [@Mafia Reunion - NIGHT ZERO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-night-zero/776315/76): > > Assuming 37 Town and that only town get lynched and NKed, with 3 kills per Night (Mafia, Wolves, Vig) (Aside - Sario is playing this game???) And continued toDay: > [@raventhief](#): > > 36 bullet holes? The mayor had 37… of course, now we are down a townie. Sachertorte and I doubted it had any meaning: > [@sachertorte](#): > > Yes. It does seem like a statement that there are 36 Town roles. But the color doesn’t really make sense. Why would there be a bullet hole for each Town Player? I would make more sense that there is a bullet hole for each Mafia. It could be like a puzzle room or Myst where clues are just scattered about and don’t necessarily make logical sense, but it seems like a strange clue to give. > [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > I’d suspect it’s a red herring, if the mods wanted to tell us that there are exactly 17 town powers, 20 VT, 4 third parties and 14 scum, they’d do it in the rules, right? ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/992 "2017-01-14T13:58:03Z")
@Guiri :I don’t know about the last game, didn’t play in it. Maybe we’ve been talking past eachother? I thought you wanted examples where Colby was lynched as town Day 1, for a “weird turn of phrase”, slip or similar. I don’t have a ready example of one where he turned out to be scum. I reviewed the games again, and even though I think we might have misunderstood eachother, I see your point re: Lords and Ladies:smack:. I think HoH is a better example. He was in character, but he did get votes for foot-in-mouth-syndrome and posting strange stuff. I also think the dismissiveness of his goodbye posts after having been lynched might be coloring my perception a bit… I think mostly it comes down to a feel, that his play toDay is reconcilable with his town play, but I realise “feel” is not a very strong argument, so please “feel” free to ignore it. * * * And just to make myself clear: I’m not arguing that a Colby-vote _necessarily_ is a bad vote I’m just giving a reason for why I’m not voting him, though I have to admit his later posts makes it tempting. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/993 "2017-01-14T13:58:39Z")
Thanks for the explanation, **GuiriEnEspaña**. But don’t scum proofread their posts? Wouldn’t the Scummy PIS have been blatant if he read the post? But “that can’t be blatant scum slip because it’s _too_ blatant” is the road to double-think. My Internet is flakey this evening and this may be my last chance, so I may as well choose the most suspicious of the leaders. **Unvote** **Vote Colby11** ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/994 "2017-01-14T14:16:42Z")
> [@Lakai](#): > > What’s with all the questions **GuiriEnEspaña**? Can’t make definitive statements? Don’t want to be pinned down to a position? Possibly a scum move by casting suspicion everywhere just to see what sticks? He’s provided plenty of analysis and opinions along with his questions. You on the other hand, have provided little of that along with two weak votes, a “joke” and sentiments of being persecuted. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/995 "2017-01-14T14:19:53Z")
Afternoon folks. I’ve not been keeping up with the game too well, so I find myself reading under time pressure. There’s a couple of things I want to say about Colby’s wording as I start a reread. 1. I’ve seen plenty of incidences of strange wording on Day 1 that people have seized on as evidence of scummitude. Many of the players who posted the strange wording turned out to be scum; the majority back in the early days, iirc. However, some players with strange phraseology turned out to be Town. My personal record is that every one I actually voted for turned out to be Town. So I didn’t vote before slipping away. However, Colby now has one finger of suspicion pointing at him. 2. The third vote question. The actual issue is that "the third vote **on a Townie** is placed by scum more often than random chance predicts. So please, if Colby turns out to be Town, take a close look at Septimus. More later, or tomorrow before Dusk. (I’m on GMT for those who don’t know me or have forgotten.) ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/996 "2017-01-14T14:36:33Z")
> [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](#): > > Trying to catch up. I see we have traveled a bit of a road wrt Septimus and prompted a claim. I am inclined to give that claim the benefit of the doubt and plan on settling a vote on one of the folx who were floating some dubious votes his way earlier in the Day that I remarked about at the time accusing him of running away from a flimsy bandwagon. > > I have tied some yarn to my belt loop before I go crawling back into this mess to solidify my vote. Please pull me out if you don’t hear from me by Dusk. Yank, yank, yank - are you on your way back yet? ---
**Author:** ![Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/prof.pepperwinkle/32/13627_2.png) [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Prof.Pepperwinkle)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/997 "2017-01-14T14:39:43Z")
I am Town and not party to a 3rd Party. Looking at this, I can see I need to compare my vote list to Septimus’s. And get down to that re-read today for EoD vote. ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/998 "2017-01-14T14:40:48Z")
> [@HookerChemical](#): > > Septimus: In the absence of a counterclaim, I will not vote for septimus. With a counterclaim, I would likely vote for one of the two claimants. Come again? That’s a very weak statement, knowing that one is 100% false- claiming you would likely vote one of them? ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/999 "2017-01-14T14:54:20Z")
I’m not sure what the point is but… I’m town, I’m not third party. ---
**Author:** ![BillMC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3be4f8/32.png) [@BillMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BillMC)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/1000 "2017-01-14T14:56:22Z")
Sorry, rl is rather hectic at the moment. Hopefully will have some time for a full read of d1 before end of day. Colby seems to be behaving pretty much the same way as on D1 in DanteG’s game - accused of being scum early on then being sulky/sarky. I’m not seeing much of a case on ToeJam or Angel. Tho the “I am [del]Groot[/del]Town” post from Chronos bothers me. > [@Chronos](#): > > Oh, and since we’re talking about false claims, two points: > > 1: In this game, I don’t intend to lynch any claimed Town power role, until and unless there’s a counterclaim (or countercorpse, of course). **septimus** is not yet verified; he may well be lying. But if he is, then eventually, the real EMT will show up. And we can decide then, if it happens, who we want to trust, and who gets the noose. > > 2: It is almost never a good idea for Town to lie, and it is always a good idea to lynch anyone who’s caught in a lie. If, for instance, someone claims to be vanilla, and then a watcher catches them taking some action (and the watcher is confirmed), then the claimed-vanilla dies, no ifs, ands, or buts. If it turns out that the claimant is a Town power role and was lying to try to keep the Scum guessing, then it’s their own damn fault for lying to the Town. If you want to keep the Scum guessing, then the right way to do it is to not say what your role is. > > Oh, and back to the question of third parties claiming: It might or might not be to their advantage to do so, but on thinking about it, I think it’s definitely to Town’s advantage. So I think we should force their hand. I think everyone in the game should state for the record whether they are or are not third party. In addition to possibly finding third parties and letting us evaluate their claims, this will also bind the Scums’ hands: It’s been pointed out already that the only false claims which won’t be counter-claimed are vanilla and third party, and forcing the Scum to choose now will prevent them from tailoring their lies to their situation. > > I’ll go first: **I am not third party. I am Town.** #2 is effectively “always claim truthfully” - so we shoud all just follow Idle and Pleo and claim on day 1? ah but wait, chronos has already taken pleo to task for suggesting how to play. there have been plenty of times where town has falsely claimed to town advantage - suckering in the scum. Would the mafia and wolves just claim now please and make life much simpler for us all? But given the rules with 3rd party win conditions being evaluated last, there is no motivation for a 3rd party to claim > [@Mafia Reunion - NIGHT ZERO](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-night-zero/776315/2): > > \*\*Win Conditions > \*\*Win conditions will be checked in the following order every Dawn and every Dusk: > [ol] > [li]Town Wins! if all 14 Scum players are dead.[/li][li]Mafia Wins! if the total number of living Mafia is greater than or equal to 50% of the total population AND greater than the number of living Wolves.[/li][li]Wolves Win! if the total number of living Wolves is greater than or equal to 50% of the total population AND greater than the number of living Mafia.[/li][li]Third party win conditions are checked after checking all three of the above. Thus, a Town win supersedes an exclusive third party win even if both occur simultaneously.[/li][/ol] But as others have said, no one is going to state anything contrary to this - so what is the point? similar ploys have been used in the past where their have been lie detector type roles - but we know for a fact that there are no town or scum lie detector roles. So what is Chronos’ gain by everyone stating this? something to do with his own role/win condition? This smells like a 3rd party trying to achieve something. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577.md?page=49) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577.md?page=51)