# Mafia Reunion - Day Three **URL:** \ **Category:** Thread Games\ **Created:** [January 24, 2017, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068 "2017-01-24T20:43:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**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:** [January 25, 2017, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/101 "2017-01-25T04:55:25Z")
> [@paulwhoisaghost](#): > > Has shown the they prefer lynch contenders? Based on one kill? That’s not an M.O. it’s one anecdote. You may be right and the vig might have shot at TJ last Night, but I still think scum would have hit that switch no matter what. If I was scum I would be pushing for use the switch every Night. > > Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk Speaking from experience as a terrible vig, scum would want the mandatory vig active, at least in the early part of the game when they are more than likely to hit town. But I admit there might be such a player that isn’t terrible at playing the vig. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/102 "2017-01-25T04:57:21Z")
> [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Forgot to add, concluding the summary above:\*\* paul\*\* posted eight more times between the last post quoted above and EoD, mostly about the Lutha issue. He never addressed the issue of\*\* brewha’s\*\* death likely making our Vig unusable. > > And also: **Sario?** WTF? If we don’t get some scum flips soon I am going to assume this is some Gastard game where everyone is Town and start voting for the Mods. The post you quoted was from D3… not D2. What post are you talking about? Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![nesta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a4c791/32.png) [@nesta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nesta)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/103 "2017-01-25T04:59:35Z")
> [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1276): > > … > @Thing Fish, #1099, there’s no smoking gun but there’s still meat in the vote records - I’d like to hear reasoning from nesta and inner stickler! > … My reasoning was pretty simple. I was hoping to have a chance to catch up before voting on Sunday, but life interfered, and I at least wanted to have a vote down. I came back to the game with 10 minutes to go, scanned and saw that **ToeJam** was a viable candidate, and thought he was the best option that had any chance of being lynched. At the time of my vote, though, I wasn’t even sure what the vote count was so didn’t know if it really mattered. I stated in [D2.473](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19934443&postcount=473) that I thought **brewha** was probably town, and despite the lie I still thought so. His switch claim was unforced, and I could read his fishing for advice on how to use the switch as townie. I found **Crys75’s** third party claim, also unforced, believable. It is something that needs to be examined, but due to the win conditions of third parties counting against scum, I thought her lynch was shortsighted. Lynching her was an easy, lazy lynch, and I thought it needed another Day at least to think through the logic of it. That left **ToeJam** , who I found scummy D1 but didn’t vote for him (I wish I would have) because he wasn’t around to defend himself. I felt he was the best choice of the three leaders. If I had felt like making a one-off vote it would have been **Pleonast** or **Chronos** (oops), but at the late hour those seemed like useless votes. I was wrong about **Chronos** , but **Pleo** needs a good looking at. I’m tempted to vote **ToeJam** , but he asked for justification, and I’d like to review and give it to him before an official vote. Also, even though I think he’s scum, there are 13 others out there, so I’m trying not to focus on just him. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/104 "2017-01-25T05:01:27Z")
> [@LightFoot](#): > > we know the order of operations for wincons. so until we get close to that threshold we are good, non? But we don’t know their wincon. We don’t know if it is for them to complete a chain of all 5 of them having investigated another without dying or if it’s something really crazy like fulfilling a list of unlikely to survive tasks… who knows. If they aren’t telling the truth it could be anything and without knowing what we have no clue when it will be achieved. If it’s before town or scum meet their wincon, then they win. But I’m going to proceed with leaving them alone for now and hoping they toe the line and act in towns best interest. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/105 "2017-01-25T05:04:18Z")
Too much fucking Blue!! \>:( But at least we are down to a trickle of drips. Trying to be optimistic. Toejam, you killed me with your killing us down here groaner. 😛 Lots of people have been nipping at you since Day 1 and I really don’t want to have to go try and get a better idea about why. Then you came back after lurking like a mofo and they still want to hang you and try and decide who else to hang based on how they feel about how other people feel about hanging you or not. The whole mess stinks of distraction to me. I want to trust in a benevolent cult but I can’t yet and admit that I will not be sad if one of y’all confirms some stuff by way of dying. Nothing personal. Now to remind myself of the Wizard… ---
**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:** [January 25, 2017, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/106 "2017-01-25T05:07:39Z")
Sooo, here’s a thought. Might have Sario thought that Toejam is town and thus protected him from batman? I wish he would have at least popped in to give his thoughts. ---
**Author:** ![LightFoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e8cbc/32.png) [@LightFoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LightFoot)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/107 "2017-01-25T05:18:47Z")
> [@paulwhoisaghost](#): > > But we don’t know their wincon. We don’t know if it is for them to complete a chain of all 5 of them having investigated another without dying or if it’s something really crazy like fulfilling a list of unlikely to survive tasks… who knows. If they aren’t telling the truth it could be anything and without knowing what we have no clue when it will be achieved. If it’s before town or scum meet their wincon, then they win. > > But I’m going to proceed with leaving them alone for now and hoping they toe the line and act in towns best interest. > > Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk fair ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/108 "2017-01-25T05:21:50Z")
> [@snfaulkner](#): > > Sooo, here’s a thought. Might have Sario thought that Toejam is town and thus protected him from batman? I wish he would have at least popped in to give his thoughts. I had this thought… and that he used the rest of his spells to tell us that, claim, prevent being a distraction, and give us the reveal all at once… but then again, why not just post and then use the spells. Better guess, IRL got the better of him, he was aware that a mod kill or his mislynch might be in the works and he couldn’t keep up with the game so he did the best thing he could for town being bowing out and used his remaining spells… Or it doesn’t really matter other than we know there are between 1 and 7 people protected from the DK toDay. 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:** [January 25, 2017, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/109 "2017-01-25T05:27:31Z")
> [@ToeJam](#): > > I think this is a terrible idea. It exposes the Vig, and we’ve already lost our Wizard. It basically allows the Scum access to more power roles and gains nothing in terms of credibility to save me. > > If you’re the Vig, don’t claim just for me. I’d rather hang, than you out yourself. > -R Who said anything about saving you? I specifically mentioned it being additional information against you. > [@sinjin](#): > > No, batman should not claim. What good would that do? If he says he targeted **Toejam** or anybody else it just places a target on his back. Hopefully we will eventually lynch the other switch holder and batman will again be empowered. Eh, it’s possible I’m wrong and it won’t help any, which is why I asked for other people’s thoughts. I considered it to be another data potential data point. I don’t consider Batman being outted a major downside, since he’s effectively vanilla for at least the likely near future. The odds that the other switchholder goes down before Batman is fairly low. Upon further reflection, I do get that with a claim those odds go down to nearly zero. And thinking it through some more, if the switchholder is Mafia, and we are set to lynch said switchholder, then they will likely just DK Batman. In which case, the only way Batman gets a shot is if the switch person is Wolf, or some other mechanism kills him or her unexpectedly. I guess I’ve talked myself out of the idea. Meh, that’ll teach me to post at night. ---
**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:** [January 25, 2017, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/110 "2017-01-25T05:29:34Z")
It seems like the by far most likely option is that he felt he couldn’t keep playing for whatever reason and didn’t want to get modkilled, so did what he could to best help his team. If we assume all 7 protections were still available, which seems reasonable, that means there’s at least a reasonable shot at the DK being foiled. ---
**Author:** ![LightFoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e8cbc/32.png) [@LightFoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LightFoot)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/111 "2017-01-25T05:34:12Z")
> [@paulwhoisaghost](#): > > I had this thought… and that he used the rest of his spells to tell us that, claim, prevent being a distraction, and give us the reveal all at once… but then again, why not just post and then use the spells. > > Better guess, IRL got the better of him, he was aware that a mod kill or his mislynch might be in the works and he couldn’t keep up with the game so he did the best thing he could for town being bowing out and used his remaining spells… > > Or it doesn’t really matter other than we know there are between 1 and 7 people protected from the DK toDay. > Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk Just One for certain This Day- there have been other phases where the power may have been used - each Day Night cycle ‘could’ have had protected people. we need to factor that in somehow too… arg although I can’t help but wonder why they didn’t post prior to sending in the last order- a question for after game ---
**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:** [January 25, 2017, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/112 "2017-01-25T06:10:13Z")
🆒 > [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](#): > > It seems like the by far most likely option is that he felt he couldn’t keep playing for whatever reason and didn’t want to get modkilled, so did what he could to best help his team. If we assume all 7 protections were still available, which seems reasonable, that means there’s at least a reasonable shot at the DK being foiled. Attrition. This game is going to take a toll on everyone playing. * * * \*\*Vote Toejam \*\* It makes sense to me that if the vig was purposely shut down, it was done to protect the most likely target, **Toejam**. While there is no way to tell for certain that the vig didn’t kill because the switch was turned off, it seems a reasonable guess. ---
**Author:** ![Hoopy\_Frood](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hoopy_frood/32/8452_2.png) [@Hoopy\_Frood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hoopy_Frood)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/113 "2017-01-25T06:25:39Z")
> [@bufftabby](#): > > The run onto **ToeJam** so late yesterDay was weird, and I don’t know what to make of it. We know it wasn’t scum trying to save their own teammate, and I don’t see the **Brewha** voters as scum jumping ship from a vote they know is going to turn up Town, because a) they don’t know that, Mafia would only know it wasn’t them and Wolves the same, and could have been scum from their opposing team, and b) a vote for a liar who turns out to be Town is pretty easily defensible. I don’t necessarily believe in lynching _all_ liars, but typically IME liars are not Town, and if they are, should fess up sooner than later when possible. If Brewha had done so when he claimed, I think many of us would have found that understandable. > > However, in the matter of **ToeJam** , although the late Day vote jumps onto him seem odd to me, I do recognize the aggressive style of play he came back with. I know of at least once in a previous game that Townie-me was poked and prodded and absolutely enraged by scum-him. I only recall seeing that from him as scum. Take that with a grain of five-year-old salt, as that’s how long I’ve been gone. Yeah, the movement was kind of weird. Furthermore, if a scum faction has control of the vig switch, they’d want brewha dead so that they can turn the vig on or off at their whim. So those who stayed on Brewha yesterDay have extra reason to stay there if they control the other switch. Of course, with Crys’s paranoia of vig kills, it’s possible one of the LUTHA fear the vig wants to target them and so have switched the vig off. Personally, I think it would be a lazy play for the vig to target them, and at this point such a move wouldn’t give town as much info as other targets would. And right now town needs info on scum far more than it needs some sort of confirmation on third parties. Then again, Brewha was self-proclaimed anti-vig and said he was going to flip his switch, so maybe there’s another townie who feels that way. I’d still say the vig running free at this point is better than not. We have a lot of people and not much information. In smaller games, an active vig can be a liability until scum patterns can be established. But this game is huge. Town needs information right now, and a vig can help that. In a game this large, the vig actually is less a liability now than he would be in the mid-game. Both trains on Crys and Brewha seem to have came fast and furious. And there are certainly good scummy reasons to be on either one. I don’t have time right now to review those votes, but my vote toDay (at least the first one today) will probably come from one of those. > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Oh yeah, can’t forget this gem from earlier today: > > Yeah, “those people”. Too bad\*\* paul\*\* forgot to warn us about this at the time.:rolleyes: > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Forgot to add, concluding the summary above:\*\* paul\*\* posted eight more times between the last post quoted above and EoD, mostly about the Lutha issue. He never addressed the issue of\*\* brewha’s\*\* death likely making our Vig unusable… What are you going on about? Why would he need to? I brought it up in post #444. Someone else may have done so as well in a different post. (I can’t be arsed to look and it doesn’t matter for my point anyway.) It’s not as if those of us paying attention were unaware that a dead Brewha could nerf the vig. > [@Nanook\_of\_the\_North\_Shore](#): > > An idea just occurred to me that might be a worthwhile pursuit, and would potentially give a lot of information regarding toejam. > > There’s at least a reasonable possibility that Batman would have targeted toejam last night. There is furthermore a reasonable possibility that one of the scum teams holds Batman’s other switch, meaning they can turn him off at will. Together, this indicates at least the possibility that scum turned off Batman to protect toejam. The question then becomes is there any way to confirm or otherwise pull more information out of this situation? > > What if Batman were to claim today, and tell us who he or she targeted last night? If it was indeed toejam, that would be a strong indication that the logic presented above is true, at which point lynching toejam is extremely compelling as it is very likely he is in fact scum. > > The downside of such a plan of course is that Batman is now exposed. But how much of a downside is it really? If scum do in fact hold the other switch, Batman isn’t really any better than vanilla at this point, and won’t stop being so until/unless the other switch holder dies. And since we have clearly seen that switches are not revealed on death, the only people who will know when Batman is unleashed again will be the scum team that holds the switch. Even Batman won’t know for sure, since there’s no way for him or her to know if the target died to him or her, or if it was just coincidence. > > Thoughts? Bad idea. Because even if the switch holder dies, the scum have a blocker, and so they can block Batman indefinitely and kill him at their leisure. And if ToeJam was targeted by batman, that’s no guarantee that the scum hit the switch to save ToeJam. They might have stopped him regardless. And we’d have to lynch ToeJam regardless. Plus you even concede that they might have turned it off in general. Because you say that Batman is effectively Vanilla now until the other switchholder dies. Why? Wouldn’t the scum turn Batman back on once ToeJam is dead if they’re leashing him just to save Toejam? Your logic makes no sense. If Batman did come out and said he didn’t target ToeJam, would you still vote ToeJam? If we want ToeJam’s reveal, why don’t we just lynch him? We end up with the same result as with your plan, and we keep a power role hidden. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/114 "2017-01-25T06:30:30Z")
> [@sinjin](#): > > No, batman should not claim. What good would that do? If he says he targeted **Toejam** or anybody else it just places a target on his back. Hopefully we will eventually lynch the other switch holder and batman will again be empowered. I know Nanook already replied to this, but I agree and was thinking the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/115 "2017-01-25T06:46:25Z")
WoW on DiggitCamara I’m finally getting around to this. Not much here though… pretty quiet, but still participating… maybe just enough to avoid suspicion? 15 posts and we are on D3. 5 posts from D1 and 10 from D2. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/249): > > Having pretty little to base anything on, I vote > > **Vote Colby11** > > The “very small base” comes from the possible slip in this post: seems to me that speaking about “the other team” might mean that Colby actually is on one of the scum teams. I didn’t like the scum slip theory when I was trying to catch up. I can see how it was misleading, but it shouldn’t have been a reason to vote in and of itself… of course hindsight is 20/20 so I’ll let the townie vote go for now. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/264): > > So, as I read on, I see that a Colby bandwagon has formed. I am the first to admit that my eye is still on him/her, however this post is actually a better candidate for suspicion. I find that a defense of another player is usually given whenever the culprit actually has superior information about the other player. So, I will > > **unvote Colby** > > and > > **Vote snfaulkner** So you are still suspicious of Colby, but now that there is a bandwagon on him you feel it will be okay to disown that lynch from your voting record and move on to SNF for “defending” another player? I defend other players all the time… not because I know their alignment, but because I disagree with the argument against them. Why sit back and let bad arguments get people lynched? > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/282): > > And I would like to see some proof (as in prior games) or vote for you for that assertion, but I will have to reserve my vote for a future date because > > \*\*[The rules](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19895637&postcount=2) explicitly state no multivoting. Has that changed? > \*\* > > Otherwise, someone inform [Pleonast](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19907575&postcount=241) he needs to change his vote. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/393): > > Because I noticed a slight defense of another player in his post. > > In your case the defense was rather a more generic reference to slips which, in your mind, seldom indicate whether someone is scum or not. Notice SNF’s defense is now a slight defense, but the vote stays. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day One](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-one/776577/747): > > Actually, I believe Hockey Monkey was referring to my subsequent unvote. > > So: > > [ol] > [li]no, I hadn’t seen a Colby vote when I voted; it was simply a very strong slip in my mind. [/li][li]In my answer to Hockey Monkey’s question I said that the reason I changed my vote was because snfaulkner’s comment on the Colby vote was a very slight defense of Colby (unlike, for instance, Hockey Monkey’s who was commenting on the situation, not the person[/li][/ol] Now its a very slight defense. And semantics. I agree the unvote didn’t sit right with me. That’s all the D1 posts… 5 posts… in 5 posts Diggit managed to vote, unvote, switch votes from the person she thought was scum to someone defending the person she thought was scum, and backpedal twice. Pretty busy for 5 posts, but still doesn’t address anything else in the game, doesn’t even comment on Lakai… or ToeJam. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/230): > > Counter: this is very weak analysis, actually. The fact that scum doesn’t have perfect information doesn’t preclude a weak defense of everyone who ISN’T on their team. It would be interesting if, while doing so, they would by chance vote for someone on the opposing team. > > But still, this defense pings me. Not enough to change my > > **vote for snfaulkner** Admits the case is really weak, but continues the vote anyway. Still no comment on Lakai or ToeJam. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/250): > > When you’re right, you’re right. > > **Vote snfaulkner** > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/255): > > By the way, these quotes (most of which I spoilered to not clutter the thread) confirm my notion that **snfaulkner** is up to no good. Most of his participation has been either fluff or cozying up to other players ( **Chronos** , for instance). To me, this kind of behavior is a clear marker for scummi(sp?)hood I guess you gotta find some reason to justify votes right, that other case wasn’t really holding up so I guess it needed reinforcement? > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/547): > > I agree with the first part: a mass claim of Town Vanilla folk won’t really benefit us at all. > > I also agree with the second part, for different reasons: > > 1. I doubt the switches were handed out to power roles within town > 2. I doubt the switch disclaimers (so far) are scum > 3. If I am right, scum now has a smaller pool of “targets” (presuming that scum actually will target power roles first) > 4. The specificity of **brewha** ’s claim has put a large target on his back. If scum have a second switch, it is in their interest to offsky him and, that way, control when Batman will be able or not to kill. I actually agree with this post. I think it might be why we have been seeing an uptick in power role deaths, there were a lot of people claiming or saying things that revealed they either didn’t have a switch or that they weren’t one role or another or just flat out that they were nilla town. Each comment narrows the pool. I’m assuming “disclaimers” was supposed to be “claimers”. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/552): > > Seems likely. But since we have, unfortunately, a few additional switch “holders” maybe they could confirm the timeline? More switch talk. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/588): > > Two masonic groups? One with knowledge about the other members and the other without? > > Not buying it. > > **Unvote > Vote Crys75** Not a Masonic group… masons typically have private chat and are still part of town. They are a cult with a weirdo power and a survival wincon. But you know, thats a better vote than the SNF vote, IMHO. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/596): > > Redacted, maybe. But I simply cannot see two masonic groups like these, both being on the town side. And we KNOW there is a legitimately townie masonic group out there. > > One of the pointers to said redaction is that we have [the win conditions](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19895637&postcount=2) which explicitly state (bleached): > > Crys tells us her win conditions are > one of the two must be wrong. And I am betting there was a modification in the latter one. In case it isn’t obvious because of the lack of quotes within quotes, the point here was that the 3P winton wasn’t consistent with the Roles doc. It is, Diggit was misinterpreting the roles doc which states that exclusive 3P wins are superseded by town or scum wins. Crys claimed a nonexclusive wincon. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/606): > > You may be right. However, that makes them, at best, a neutral group. And by her own admission, a neutral group with a switch in her hands. That switch gives her an (additional?) power… and we don’t know whether the other cult members have other powers which could come to bite us in the ass. > > One possibility that comes to mind and which would modify our behavior towards them is that they have all the power to search for their fellow cultists and, once they have found them, they gain some additional power to forward their individual win condition. > > Unlike the other roles, the third party’s powers and win conditions are unknown. I think it’s in our best interest to get them out of the way. YMMV I disagree with this assessment of the 3P situation… > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/816): > > **[Dead people get a vote?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19922668&postcount=1214)** Somehow missed Lakai subbed back in. > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/820): > > Must have. Rubs me the wrong way actually: I believe that the mere act to sub a dead player back in makes a re-read that much harder. Townies coming back from the dead bugs Diggit apparently…. its not that hard, just disregard D1 when assessing Lakai v2.0. And that is it. At least Diggit commented on the switches and the 3P. And kind of comments on Brewha, in the sense that they seem to take Brewha at his word and mentions he probably has a target on his back. No comment on ToeJam or those who call for his head. And the vote stays on a claimed cultists… which I disagree with. We need to kill scum and use the 3P as population padding and hopefully have them working with us to eliminate scum… for now. Lynching them is a step closer to the scum wincon not towns. All in all I don’t like it. I’m not a huge fan of the case against ToeJam, who has the most votes right now I believe… but maybe Digit will come in and vote for Crys or Sach or SNF and get an alternate wagon rolling. Or maybe they will finally comment on the ToeJam situation on the third Day of people calling for his head. Who knows. I don’t even think there is enough here to warrant a vote. Just a few awkward votes and unvotes that ping me. I guess I’ll keep looking and keep an eye on Diggit. ---
**Author:** ![paulwhoisaghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e5b9ba/32.png) [@paulwhoisaghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paulwhoisaghost)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/116 "2017-01-25T07:30:13Z")
I was looking back at N2 and found this a bit interesting. I missed it the first go through, but knowing that by the numbers scum gain progress toward their wincon by killing 3P, town do not consider this post > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/1321): > > Well that is the dilemma. But if they have a win condition that can interfere with ours, that means we do need to lynch them before we lynch all the Scum. Thus increasing our lynch burden substantially. That doesn’t seem plausible if there is 5 of them. But what if there’s fewer, maybe 2? Then eliminating them is not unreasonable. > > This is the reasoning why Town needs to see all LUTHA claim sooner rather than later. Having 5 players saying “yes, I’m LUTHA” and cross-confirming each other would completely remove them as a threat, in mine eyes. Five is the number claimed and so having five actually claiming would virtually confirm them (just like claimed Masons, one would have to die at some point to confirm the group as a whole). I’d advocate lynching anyone trying to lynch LUTHA at that point, since they’d be threatening only to Scum at that point. > > But either fewer or more than that indicates someone is lying. And we’d have to start lynching claimed LUTHA once we have a few Scum eliminated. Pleo, do you still feel this way? I’m liking this as a reason for Lynch better than my reasoning against DiggitCamara or the case against ToeJam. Unless Toejam feels the same way. I’ll have to go look. If he does it tips the scales for me. I am also suspicious of… Thing Fish, but I feel I may be letting myself become OMGUS biased. Prof P. for previous discussed reasons Koldanar for only really participating in D2 by calling out non-participants. But I haven’t had the opportunity to look very closely at them yet. So… \*\* Vote Pleonast \*\* But I’m gonna keep looking at others. 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:** [January 25, 2017, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/117 "2017-01-25T07:39:46Z")
> [@Hoopy\_Frood](#): > > What are you going on about? Why would he need to? I brought it up in post #444. Someone else may have done so as well in a different post. (I can’t be arsed to look and it doesn’t matter for my point anyway.) It’s not as if those of us paying attention were unaware that a dead Brewha could nerf the vig. I just wanted to comment on this to point out that there was no “could” about it. That part of the discussion took place at Night, after Brewha had flipped town. Which means he was telling the truth and was holding the batswitch. Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk ---
**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:** [January 25, 2017, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/118 "2017-01-25T10:57:42Z")
My current thoughts: **ToeJam** The Most Likely To Be Scum and the one whose reveal will be the most useful in interpreting Day 1. His insistence that he is the most likely target for the scum kill and his notion that vanillas should target themselves were just bizarre. He needs to go next. **Idle Thoughts** Started Day 2 with a vote on ToeJam for very poor reasons > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/32): > > Crappy start. > > Okay, to make up for not voting yesterday, I’m putting down a vote early today. Right now, in fact. > > Vote ToeJam > > It’s possible that all of the forerunners for lynch the Day before were Town, but I feel it’s also very likely that at least one was scum…that would mean ToeJam is it. ToeJam was indeed looking like scum, but the reasoning is terrible and there is good scum motivation for this vote: 1. As the previous Day’s runner up, ToeJam was a reasonable possibility of being lynched, so look good by being one of the early voters 2. ToeJam was also looking a real possibility of a modkill, so a good way to waste the lynch Idle has also been extremely quiet, which is is very atypical of his play as town. **Boozahol Squid** Very noisy, but very little substance. One post I particularly disliked was from Day 2: > [@Mafia Reunion - Day Two](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-two/777425/100): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by AngeloftheNorth > > Yup. Besides me who else do you suspect? > > It’s a one vote game. Unless you’ve got a role to claim, I don’t need to come up with further suspicions. For the record, I’m generally distrustful of the group of voters that pushed the **Lakai** bandwagon at the eleventh hour yesterDay, though (q.v. my post #1116 from the Day One thread.) That’s where I’ll start if for some reason I start to think you’re not scummier than a frat house bathtub. It was a reasonable question with a completely unhelpful response: “I’ve got my vote down, I don’t need to do any more” Also, he is way too keen on lynching all the claimed cultists, even though they would be mislynches. \*\*Enderw24 \*\* > [@Enderw24](#): > > I want to look up Sach’s history a bit more. The 3rd party play would be a very ballsy gambit, I agree. But what purpose did it serve at the time of claiming? Were they both under that much pressure to break down like that on Day 2? That seems very hasty for something that could massively backfire. > > Currently, I’m opposed to wasting a lynch on known or suspected 3rd party. That may change. > At the same time, I’m almost certain Crys is lying. > > First of all, even in a game this size, having Town, Wolves, Mafia, AND a FIVE person 3rd party? That’s almost as large as each scum team. That’s not a 3rd party, that’s a fourth faction! And a 3rd party with (multiple?) power roles that’s completely off the radar in regards to Role PMs? > > And why does 3rd party need power roles anyway? If the win condition is just to survive, why the hell would they need to investigate anyone? Lynch them all! Who cares as long as they stick around. > > And why would their win condition be to just survive to the end? Why would the mods have so much explanation in the rules about potential exclusive win conditions for 3rd party if there wasn’t one in the game? > > No. Nothing about Crys’s claim makes a lick of sense. > It’s all a lie. > > But I just don’t know what to do about it. I agree with Angel and Nanook. This looks like an attempt to cast suspicion on the claimed cult. As for “Why would the mods have so much explanation in the rules about potential exclusive win conditions for 3rd party if there wasn’t one in the game?”, it’s quite simple: there is almost certainly some hostile third party(s) in the game. It does not mean that every third party is necessarily hostile. So that’s \*\*ToeJam Idle Thoughts Boozahol Squid Enderw24 \*\* I’m happy to vote for any of these. For toDay **Vote ToeJam** ---
**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:** [January 25, 2017, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/119 "2017-01-25T11:04:57Z")
There have been suggestions of “Lynch the Lurker”, but that is unlikely to work. There are several players who could be considered lurkers. Townie votes on them will probably be spread out, which makes it easy for scum to place just a few votes to ensure that a non scum is lynched. So any concerted attmept to lynch in the lurker pool is almost certainly going to hit town. Lurkers are best left to the vig. But with the vig seeming to be nerfed, that is looking unlikely. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2017, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068/120 "2017-01-25T11:50:50Z")
Responding to thisas I catch up the posts made overnight. > [@Crys75](#): > > Oh yeah and I [random.Org](http://random.Org) picked mhaye for investigation and mhaye isn’t lutha I confirm I am not LUTHA. I am Town. … yes I know I would say that, wouldn’t I? (Unless I was a Jester and needed to die by Day 3.) Back to reading D3. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-reunion-day-three/778068.md?page=7)