# MAFIA: The Game - Ideal for Beginners \[Game in Progress\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Thread Games\ **Created:** [July 14, 2015, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099 "2015-07-14T00:45:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 40
**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:** [July 30, 2015, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/781 "2015-07-30T20:33:38Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > I don’t have that many posts during Day 1. Have you really not read through them all despite the fact that you’ve called me out for both lurking and posting “ludicrous” arguments? I know I read them all, but I don’t remember any of them. I keep a notebook of every post that I think has something substantive to say, and none of your other posts made it in there. Is it your opinion that we need to exhaustively review someone’s entire posting history before we are permitted to comment on them? ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/782 "2015-07-30T20:40:01Z")
> [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Damn, **Bayard.**. That was really remarkable. Great work. > > But, since apparently nobody else had the same reaction I did to his “Exciting!” post, I guess I was overreacting. And without that weighing against him, I have to agree with **Nonsuch** that I don’t see him as quite scummy enough to warrant a vote at this point (but the Day is young!). Thanks. I didn’t like his “Exciting!” post either. I’m not sure if it was a scum tell or just his callous disregard for other townies, though. **Jimmy Chitwood** is right, of course, about the important distinction between a wolf and a townie, even a crazy and obnoxious one. Fair point. I may soften my stance later in the Day, and I may find someone I’m more ready to call out for being a wolf, but for now I’m leaving my vote on **Plumpudding**. I would just like to reiterate my fallback request – if you’re not going to vote for **Plumpudding** , at least join me in pushing him to the fringes of the discussion. Another Day dominated by the Plumpudding Show is not good for Town. ---
**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:** [July 30, 2015, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/783 "2015-07-30T20:43:08Z")
So in other words, I haven’t made any substantive posts and there aren’t very many of them and I’ve been lurking in a sinister fashion, but going back to read that small pool of non-substantive posts would be “exhaustive.” Got it. I’ll help ya out. > [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > Pm received. I’m about to get in the car for an eight hour rude, so I won’t be posting until tonight or tomorrow. > [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > Not lurking - just on vacation. > [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > About to hop into the car again. I will endeavor to check up on the thread via phone towards th end of the day. > [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > Okay! 13 hours in the car, but I am home now and will contribute. In other words, four separate posts where I made a point of letting everyone know that I was still keeping up and giving time frames on when I’d be around. Hope that helps. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/784 "2015-07-30T20:47:30Z")
> [@Precambrianmollusc](#): > > Why would you vote to protect Septimus? > I could understand if you said " I voted for texcat because I found her to be the more scummy of the two leading lynch candidates" , but claiming your vote reason was to protect some one you had no idea was town, makes no sense. > You now know that Septimus was town, but that would be retroactively applying your reasoning for voting for texcat, sounds to me like you are a wolf and trying to claim some town cred by claiming to protect a now confirmed town > > Vote Thingfish Just to circle back to this — I don’t agree with this reasoning nor this vote. As an attempt to cast suspicion, it feels forced. Not vouching 100% for **Thing Fish,** but I don’t find anything scummy in his voting or his rationale. ---
**Author:** ![Precambrianmollusc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/precambrianmollusc/32/63_2.png) [@Precambrianmollusc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Precambrianmollusc)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/785 "2015-07-30T20:53:43Z")
In agreement with others, I am not seeing Plums posting as scummy, just a confused townie who is not as incisive as he thinks he is. We could also probably do with just getting on with the game and not focus so much on what is not likable about his posting style. Anyway Thingfish - I agree it is just three words, but scum slips are rarely long. If it is a scum slip. ---
**Author:** ![Precambrianmollusc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/precambrianmollusc/32/63_2.png) [@Precambrianmollusc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Precambrianmollusc)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/786 "2015-07-30T20:57:15Z")
> [@Nonsuch](#): > > Just to circle back to this — I don’t agree with this reasoning nor this vote. As an attempt to cast suspicion, it feels forced. Not vouching 100% for **Thing Fish,** but I don’t find anything scummy in his voting or his rationale. his statement of protecting Septimus really jumped out to me as smacking of too much knowledge and retroactively applying reasoning for his vote. ---
**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:** [July 30, 2015, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/787 "2015-07-30T21:46:31Z")
> [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > So in other words, I haven’t made any substantive posts and there aren’t very many of them and I’ve been lurking in a sinister fashion, but going back to read that small pool of non-substantive posts would be “exhaustive.” Got it. > > I’ll help ya out. > > In other words, four separate posts where I made a point of letting everyone know that I was still keeping up and giving time frames on when I’d be around. Hope that helps. OK, point taken. Do you think it’s suspicious that those four non-game-related one-line posts in the course of a 12 page thread didn’t stick in my memory? If I were going to re-read all of someone’s posts, it would be someone I thought was scummy. And if you will recall, this whole argument was started by your reaction to a post in which I said I had “relatively low suspicion” of you. You are just one in a long list of people who have made arguments I thought were poorly thought through, most of which I haven’t had the time to specifically respond to. In your case, your argument was directly related to the lynch of **septimus** , so I addressed it while analyzing said lynch. I’m now a bit more suspicious based on your goalpost-moving attack on me today, but honestly, I have spent far more time thinking about you this afternoon than I did all of Day One put together. ---
**Author:** ![DiggitCamara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@DiggitCamara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DiggitCamara)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/788 "2015-07-30T21:48:57Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > Thanks! I respect your vote. I would just encourage you to consider that a loose cannon townie is not much better for us than a wolf. He makes rational play difficult and increases the odds of mislynch. > > (snip) If we can’t lynch him, let’s at least marginalize him. > > (Fun fact. Did you know there is a 25,000 character limit on posts? I do now!) Sorry, I absolutely can’t agree on the first part with you. My first Mafia pitted me at the very end against 2 others (I had the deciding vote) and I really learned to appreciate that there is strength in numbers. That’s why I didn’t snip the last part, in fact. If you ever believe you’re voting against Townfolk, take a step back and look at the whole thing objectively. Worst thing a Townie can do is annoy you (and believe you me, there are players whose style makes you wish they hadn’t signed up. Plumpudding is a feather-weight in that respect) ---
**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:** [July 30, 2015, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/789 "2015-07-30T21:53:13Z")
> [@Precambrianmollusc](#): > > his statement of protecting Septimus really jumped out to me as smacking of too much knowledge and retroactively applying reasoning for his vote. Wait, which is it? Did I say that on purpose as part of my diabolical scheme to make myself look townie, or did I accidentally say it, not realizing that it would reveal my perfect knowledge? And why don’t you find the detailed explanation I provided in [post 768](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18561823&postcount=768) convincing, or at least worthy of a response? ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/790 "2015-07-30T22:03:26Z")
> [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Wait, which is it? Did I say that on purpose as part of my diabolical scheme to make myself look townie, or did I accidentally say it, not realizing that it would reveal my perfect knowledge? This starts to look to me like an attempt to quickly undercut **Thing Fish** and his cogent, pro-Town wrap-up of Day 1, perhaps to stall it from gaining any traction. ---
**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:** [July 30, 2015, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/791 "2015-07-30T22:17:32Z")
> [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > OK, point taken. Do you think it’s suspicious that those four non-game-related one-line posts in the course of a 12 page thread didn’t stick in my memory? :smack: Wrong again. Only two of those were one-line posts. You still haven’t read them, have you? And one of them is the header to the substantive post that’s in your notes! C’mon, man! At this point I’m just feeling disrespected. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/792 "2015-07-30T22:31:13Z")
Alright, I promised another post on TexCat. After this I’ll stay shut for a while as I have people to meet and a dog to mourn. I may not be the most eloquent, or the easiest to follow, but I hope you atleast try. Keep in mind, my case was for a DAY ONE vote, and for a day one vote this one is quite substantial. Having at worst nothing to go after day one, this is A LOT. > [@TexCat](#): > > I am firmly on the side of no ties. (Because of headaches from all the what-ifs). Actually, I just plan on ignoring the issue and voting for the person I find the most wolfish. > > Right now my FOS (finger of suspicion) is on the Dante voters for taking what seems like a easy path. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > She, an experienced player, suggests to ignore a potentially beneficial strategy, then points her FOS at players with legitimate reasons for voting, without voting herself, nor giving a compelling reason for stretching her finger and not casting a vote. FOS on people with a good reason to vote Dante G ON DAY ONE. > [@TexCat](#): > > If we’re at a number disadvantage, we’ve lost. And if we ever gain an information advantage, we will be on the path of victory. > > We will know exactly how many masons we have at every point. When someone dies through day votes or night kill, their card is flipped, and we learn their role and team. We should only use this stategy after our power roles are known. Are you really thinking this through? Our seer could investigate the alpha wolf tonight and we could lynch him tomorrow. Are you willing to give up that chance? This should be obvious. If you can’t see why this looks like an attempt at misdirection, read the quote over an over again. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > To me this looks like she’s promoting baseless voting. This we’ve already hashed through. It’s probably me reading too much into nothing and I’ve apologized already. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Okay, I’ve read through all of **TexCat** ’s posts… > > Maybe it’s just a funny coincidence… First highlighting how being helpful may be scummy, then being helpful, albeit not too helpful; I did give a reply stating why I believed sharing my stats would be beneficial anyway, namely: > > 1: To keep it going and having it publically for any to read. More transparency, and if anyone distrust my record-keeping, you’re all free to compare my numbers: Just count posts made before Night Zero and subtract that from the total. > > 2: It removes the posts from before the game started. Less clutter, more accurate information. > > 3: It forces me to read the thread over and over! > > I never got a reply. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > The mason/s would have to be claimed and confirmed anyway, and as I wrote in my previous post, I’m not sure that puts them at greater risk. It also doesn’t put our power-roles at any more risk than the random voting she promoted in her earlier post. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > To me, at that point in the discussion this looks like promoting limiting the usefulness of the tactic. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Again, even if there’s a chance for exposure, I don’t believe it’s much greater than random voting anyway. None of these points were addressed. Still haven’t been addressed. > [@TexCat](#): > > [Snip] > > Did you just misread what I said? You quoted me, but it doesn’t look like you read what you quoted. I’m pretty sure voting the scummiest is not baseless. Nor is it random like you state below. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > [Snip] > No, I didn’t misread, but I read way to much into what you wrote… I read scummy intentions into your suggestions after reading your last post before this. Which I still think smells bad. I take back my comments about random voting. Never acknowlegded. > [@TexCat](#): > > WTF? First and foremost, I never promoted random voting. Where are you getting that? Secondly, as I understood Biotop’s original plan, only the 1st mason would have to claim. But thirdly, if you think that a claimed mason is not more vulnerable to a night kill than an unclaimed mason, you are just delusional. (Perhaps that also explains the random voting fantasy.) > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I’m new at this iteration of the game, and I asked a general question earlier asking wether it is more likely for a claimed mason to be NK’ed than any other unclaimed power role. I also reffered to that post. My thinking was, there is reason to believe a claimed first mason may be protected. Would the wolves take a chance on that, or try to NK another target and atleast get a kill, potentially another power-role. I don’t know and I didn’t presume. Even when rightfully accusing me of misreading your post, atleast do me the courtesy of reading mine. > [Snip] Never acknowlegded. At this moment, I didn’t lean much any other way on her, and voted myself. I felt she had either slipped up bad, or just forgot something and I waited for her to answer. > [@TexCat](#): > > I beg your pardon. How was my behavior scummy as hell? I looked at Biotop’s proposal and pointed out the disadvantages to town, that we’d likely expose the masons and that we had a chance of lynching our cop and doc. After I pointed those out, Chronos came up with a better scheme. Why are you (mis)-characterizing that as scummy? > [@TexCat](#): > > How would the power roles be able to claim? And how would we catch 2 wolves? One of us didn’t understand the plan I guess. > [@TexCat](#): > > And I never tried to shoot down the idea entirely. I said a few times that I thought it made more sense to use the plan later in the game. I went back to her posts, and saw these again. > [@TexCat](#): > > I am firmly on the side of no ties. (Because of headaches from all the what-ifs). Actually, I just plan on ignoring the issue and voting for the person I find the most wolfish. > > Right now my FOS (finger of suspicion) is on the Dante voters for taking what seems like a easy path. So clearly she is either lying, or misremembering her own posting history. Still no answer by the way. > [@TexCat](#): > > Hehehe.😛 > > **vote Septimus** > > I agree with Johnny, but as noted earlier, I did not like that Septimus’s first reaction to the scheme was to work out how scum could overcome it. A bullshit wagon-hop without any substantial reasoning behind it. If you still feel she has added anything to town’s benefit during this game, read her posts. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > [Snip] > > I do have some thoughts on **TexCat**. I don’t trust her at all. In my ill attempt at an analysis, I highlighted a few issues I had with her, and her response was to ignore _all but two_ of my points! I gave answers to her objections, one apologizing for (mis)reading to much into her post and one rebutting _her_ **misreading** of my post. And her response so far has been to **ignore** that too! **TexCat** , am I on your ignore list already? Please don’t ignore me, I’m thinking a lot about you! So much so that I’ll actually go ahead and > > Vote TexCat > > I’m gonna go back, count posts for my list and read over a few times more to get a better picture of our situation. Like Arnie, I’ll be back. And I’ll stay home all day. I got suspicious and I felt it was best to put some weight behind my finger. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Case? I wouldn’t call that a case… My vote for **TexCat** is because of how she has reacted after that post. She has defended herself without demonstrating why anyone should trust her. Emotional and aggressive posts like [372](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18539499&postcount=372),[379](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18540039&postcount=379),[380](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18540064&postcount=380), [383](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18540221&postcount=383) and [384](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18540227&postcount=384), while ignoring my response to her in post [400](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18541739&postcount=400), combined with the post that prompted my “case”, post [337](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18537868&postcount=337), do not inspire a great deal of faith in me. She seemed to be able to duck away from some heat and gain composure during the self-vote stuff. I’m also not very impressed with her reasons for any of her voting and the last one might look like an attempt to join a wagon. My “case” was to get a reaction, and to me it looks like she has reacted poorly in spades. IMO. > [Snip] This should be quite self evident. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Okay, I wanna highlight what I would call uneccessary dramatic behaviour, misleading advice and useless posting, all on page 6 for everyone to see: > Okay! I’m apparently delusional. All caps WHAT THE FUCK? Really? And then a statement, nothing more. A statement that has nothing to do with what I said. How on earth is this apparent “outrage” justified as a response? And I still haven’t gotten an answer, three pages further in. TexCat, have you put me on ignore? > No you didn’t. There weren’t any disadvantages at all. Yes, that is scummy behaviour. > Misleading and still without any new content. Just parroting. > This just makes no sense. He was quite active in helping to formulate it. This is just bullshit. > And I’ve come to believe yet again that this is a lie to, apart from the woman-stuff. No! They should co-operate and argue and scrutinize every inch of every post. No one should vote just whatever they think! \*\*Whatever \*\*being the key word. This is a “helpful” statement, do not believe her intentions are for the best of town. This should also be self evident. > [@TexCat](#): > > I haven’t put you on ignore, but I am trying to ignore all of your hyperbole. You continue to lie and mischaracterize what I’ve said, and you think I should not be outraged? > > Evidently my use of the word “whoever” must have confused you. My post was a response to Thing Fish who also used the word “whoever” and yet you haven’t accused him of advocating for random voting or called his statement a lie. > > You say “There weren’t any disadvantages at all.” But there clearly were disadvantages to Biotop’s original plan. Or did you think that the further improvements on it were not improvements? > > I suspect that you are just an over-eager townie who is trying too hard to get his favorite suspect lynched, but you are not doing yourself or town any favors by all of this hyperbole, mischaracterization, and outright lies. Weaseling, nitpicking and no defense other than “poor me”. Why I object to that should also be quite evident. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > So you haven’t \*put \*me on ignore, but you are ignoring me? When have I lied? I once made a mistake, I agree, though now I’m unsure if it was. Sorry, I’ve been quite forthcoming during the game. I can’t say the same for you. And she still isn’t. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > If you believe what you and **Thing Fish** said is the same, \*you \*are the one that’s delusional. But I don’t actually think that you are. You are scum. The last sentence here is over the top, I agree, but the rest still stands. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > No there weren’t. Some people posited that there was a very small possibility that it might be able for wolves to get our numbers down enough to win, but I wholehartedly believe that that would not actually happen. To many wolves would die early in the game, most likely their most important first, and the information from that would likely give the rest away. Again I have to explain why her objection to the tie-breaker tactic is wrong. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I may be eager, and I may be aggressive, but that is just who I am. I have not lied, and so far all I’ve posted is either things I find suspicious and/or my theories around that. I may not be doing myself any favours, but I don’t actually _need_ to. And I even felt I had to explain myself. > [@TexCat](#): > > They are awfully close. And besides, I don’t find either of our statements scummy. What’s up with that? > > Yes, but I was clearly referring to Biotop’s plan, in this response not to you, but to Thing Fish. I was pointing out the disadvantages before Chronos chimed in at all. And here you clearly say that there were not any disadvantages at all, when there clearly were. > > I find this continued lying and mischaracterization intolerable. > > \*\*unvote Septimus > vote Plumpudding > > \*\* Hint, hint, your statement is scummy TexCat, his is not. He actually explained himself in the very same post, you did not, and still haven’t… > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Yeah, you forgot the entire rest of **Thing Fish** ’s post. As I point out here. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > You have been arguing about the same “disadvantages” in some kind of way ever since Biotop posted his plan, and you’ve never explained **WHY** you believe that, even after many posters have posted substantial posts arguing why that is not true. To be honest, you still are choosing to not respond to the meat of my posts, continuing to pick pieces here and there. Why would you do that, instead of being forthcoming? > > I’m not lying, I’m asking you questions you refuse to answer. If you feel it as untolerable, answer my questions. This was actually an honest question. If you feel mischaracterized, in a game where you’re basically guaranteed to be mischaracterized, why not just explain yourself instead of continuing to play victim. Unless you think that’s the only way for you to survive. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > So, apparently she believes I’m town, but voting me anyway. Pointed out the contradiction in her vote on me. I’ll quote this one again: > [@TexCat](#): > > [Snip] Actually, I just plan on ignoring the issue and voting for the person I find the most wolfish. > [Snip] > [@TexCat](#): > > [Snip] > I suspect that you are just an over-eager townie who is trying too hard to get his favorite suspect lynched, but you are not doing yourself or town any favors by all of this hyperbole, mischaracterization, and outright lies. > [@TexCat](#): > > A bit ired is understating it by quite a lot. > > I do remain convinced that Septimus is scum, but don’t want to go through another Day of Plumpudding’s lies and inuendos with no one taking my side. Does no one else see how he’s lied and mischaracterized all of my posts??? I originally thought he was misguided town, but he just refuses to back off or admit that he’s lying. I think I’ve pointed out more than once where he’s lied and misstated my posts, and yet not a single townie has said anything. > > But it just makes me more sure that Septimus is scum. I think Plumpudding’s ranting is designed to save Septimus. If it takes my mislynch for town to realize what’s going on, then so be it. Playing the victim. Still not one point given an answer. I’m not convinced. > [@TexCat](#): > > Biotop, Johnny Bravo has already made a case, better than I could. See posts [393](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18541222&postcount=393), [460](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18545239&postcount=460), [531](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18548844#post18548844). > > I am convinced because I know that I am town and this does not look like a town v town lynch to me. Plum would not be persisting in his diatribes against me if he were not protecting a scum buddy. He has to get me lynched or lose Septimus. > > \*\*unvote Plum > vote Septimus \*\* > > I’d rather lynch Plum, but will concede to town’s best interest. I lost Septimus. Her vote on the other hand, offers no insight other than her “supposedly” agreeing with Johnny Bravo. I don’t really believe that either. I think she knew Septimus was town. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Ah, another switch! If you answer \*all \*my questions, properly and substantially, without leaving out substantial context, without cherry picking from a much bigger post or train of thought, without misrepresenting my intentions and manage to convince me you’re town, I’ll unvote you. Until that happens, my vote will remain and I’ll continue to push on you. > > I am suspicious of **Septimus** and there are many posts of mine, going over several pages, where I have gone through why. Am I ambiguous with what I want? How about if she answers thoughtfully on ONE point of mine? > [@TexCat](#): > > This is the sort of post I expect from scum who know that they led the mislynch on town. Suddenly he’s not sure himself. Read that as please don’t blame this on me and lynch me because of it. > > Then Plum says that I am hysterical and have not provided any sort of actual defense. That’s because there is no actual case. There is only Plum’s diatribe, and everytime I try to respond to his lies and mischaracterizations, he just responds with more and worse. > > When Biotop presented his original scheme, I thought it wouldn’t work because it gave scum the chance to identify all of the masons, and it had the potential of randomly killing our cop and doc. Then in the heat of trying to explain this, I forgot that the Alpha wolf was a godfather. I originally said and I still think it would have been a great scheme for midgame when our power roles and the masons were mostly known and there were fewer cats to herd. > > I think pointing out the risks in the plan was a townie thing to do, and I would do it again. It was an immediate gut and townie reaction to the plan. > > And Plum tries to shift the blame again. First onto me, then onto me everyone else. His entire case is lies and mischaracterization, what does he expect people to add? Answer below. > [@TexCat](#): > > Oh, please, this is scummy as hell. I haven’t given town anything to suspect me for. You have. The entire case on me is hot air. You know it, and you are backpedaling and already looking for excuses for your vote. Scummy, scummy, and more scummy. > > \*\*unvote Septimus > vote Plumpudding > \*\* > > Voting for _ **whoever** _ I find the scummiest. I will be around before EOD and will move back to Septimus if town comes to their senses. But would prefer it if town came to their senses and voted Plum. Answer below. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > No, I’m quite sure of myself, as I’m keeping my vote on you. I can’t say I _know_, because I _don’t_. > Could you go back and answer all my questions please? If you’re actually town, could you calm down, go back and read what I’ve said and write a level-headed response? > When it is a lot less beneficial to use for town. Lot’s of people repeatedly provided you with reasons for why it would be beneficial to town to use it as early as possible, why it isn’t such a big deal to reveal masons in such a scheme and why a miniscule chance for our power-roles to be randomly NK’d does not negate any of that. > > Pointing out risks? In the end the plan was basically a win for town, if everyone would have followed it. You even rode underneath the whole thing, which to me(I may be reading too much into this one, but I’m not discounting it.) made it look like you were trying to avoid more heat. > Haha, wow. Yeah, I’m not blaming your situation on anyone other than yourself and I never have. I just like to know **WHY** people place votes, since their \*\*SILENCE \*\*makes it harder for all of us to determine what side they’re on, regardless of the vote. Am I not making myself clear? > [@TexCat](#): > > That’s what it looks like to me. I don’t understand what Septimus is doing? > > \*\*unvote Plum > vote Septimus > \*\* And yet another baseless wote, I would guess to save her own hide. So town, I ask you, how on earth has TexCat benefitted town? What has she contributed with that has lead to any good result at all? She was a GOOD DAY ONE vote. She could either be scum, or a very unhelpful, obstructing town. Now I’m afraid it’s too late, but there’s still a chance. I’m keeping my vote on TexCat for now, but please TexCat, if you are in fact town, explain yourself properly. Make a good defense. Back it up. Stop painting yourself as a victim and tell me and everyone else why we should trust you. We need to lynch the right candidates and if you are not, tell us why. To the rest of town, if you can’t see what I’m talking about, take off your fucking blinders and read my post again until you do. (I’ve skimmed through the thread, and if things continue the way things seem to be heading this is a lost game. Remember, Day one we could loose town, now we can’t.) ---
**Author:** ![JSexton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2015, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/793 "2015-07-30T22:44:40Z")
> [@Precambrianmollusc](#): > > his statement of protecting Septimus really jumped out to me as smacking of too much knowledge and retroactively applying reasoning for his vote. You seem to be taking “I think X is town” and calling it “I _know_ X is town” and I don’t see a justifcation for that. ---
**Author:** ![TexCat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/texcat/32/9041_2.png) [@TexCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TexCat)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/794 "2015-07-31T00:32:27Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > (Fun fact. Did you know there is a 25,000 character limit on posts? I do now!) I did not know that. Doubt if I’ve ever come close. 🆒 > [@Biotop](#): > > Nonsense. No one sniffed out any power roles. How could they? There was nothing to indicate that **septimus** was the Guardian. If he\* was\* a target it could only have been to protect **TexCat**. Otherwise he was just a target of our collective blundering stupidity. In either case the wolves got lucky. I feel bad about **Chronos** , because we had already pretty much agreed he was town and he is obviously a smart and talented player. His player skills are a huge loss to us, I fear. Wolves are not going to kill anyone we are suspicious of without a very good reason, so a smart experienced low-suspicion target was their choice. And they got lucky again. I agree with almost all of this. Wolves got lucky. Chronos was NK’d because he was town-read by most players. It’s unlikely that scum could have gotten him lynched. I did have some small hope that scum might have thought that I was a power role, since that was my primary objection to the Biotop plan, that it exposed or might accidentally lynch a power role. They might have thought I was protecting myself from exposure or lynch. Alas. > [@sangfroid](#): > > Wow…lots to cover here toDay. > One of my reasons for voting **TexCat** in the last round was due to **Chronos’** thought processes in conjunction with my own suspicions. Those suspicions are even higher now. > > I’m also looking very closely at those who have cavalierly tossed my name out there for essentially no reason at all. Doesn’t get much scummier to me. > > More to read; more to post. > I do know this: the wolves may be relishing in their victory, but Town can bounce back with an efficient hunt today. > > Clearly, some very crafty adversaries are conspiring against us. > > Just who do you believe might have the expertise, and particularly the expertise _here in this place_, to have sussed out not one but two of our key players right off the bat? Ouch! This post screams scum to me. Is this scum patting itself on the back? Crafty adversaries, relishing their victory, indeed. Especially when followed by this post. > [@sangfroid](#): > > With respect, **Biotop** , I just do not believe in that much luck. Two key Townspeople in one cycle? > I agree that the wolves would likely have no real way to tag our Guardian, but something sure stinks here and it ain’t just the decomposing carcasses of our Guardian and Third Mason. > > There was so much churn and misdirection this cycle about the tie vote potential, self-voting, and so on as well as the typical big heaping pile of last-minute shenanigans that I’m surprised anyone Town can even think straight at the moment. Excellent wolf strategy in my opinion. > > We all know this is a game of information. And disinformation. And misdirection. > > For myself, I am taking a very close look at those who put a whole lot of effort into adding to that big 'ol pile of churn (the recently dearly departed excepted, of course). A lot of words but really never says anything. Says more than once that he’s looking closely at something or someone?, but never says anything about it or them. And I have no idea why he thinks scum are so clever. Or who he thinks those clever scum are, other than saying he was suspicious of me because Chronos was. **Sangfroid** , if you are town, we need more than promises that you are looking closely. We need results and analysis of those close looks. ---
**Author:** ![TexCat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/texcat/32/9041_2.png) [@TexCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TexCat)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/795 "2015-07-31T00:54:34Z")
On Plumpudding: I originally thought that Plumpudding was misguided town stuck in a Tex tunnel and unable to see anything outside. Then when he persisted and got more vehement, I thought he must be scum protecting scum!Septimus whose wagon was building. That was obviously not the case. I am back to the opinion that he is misguided townie, but have no idea how to get him out of the tunnel aside from my death. I am still mystified by how he can be so certain (and wrong) that I am scum on so little evidence. I do have a niggling suspicion that he is scum and is going to use this tunnel to avoid voicing opinions on anyone or anything else in the game. TL;DR I have no clue what’s up with Plum. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2015, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/796 "2015-07-31T01:27:31Z")
> [@TexCat](#): > > I did not know that. Doubt if I’ve ever come close. 🆒 > > I agree with almost all of this. Wolves got lucky. Chronos was NK’d because he was town-read by most players. It’s unlikely that scum could have gotten him lynched. > > I did have some small hope that scum might have thought that I was a power role, since that was my primary objection to the Biotop plan, that it exposed or might accidentally lynch a power role. They might have thought I was protecting myself from exposure or lynch. Alas. > > Ouch! This post screams scum to me. Is this scum patting itself on the back? Crafty adversaries, relishing their victory, indeed. Especially when followed by this post. > > A lot of words but really never says anything. Says more than once that he’s looking closely at something or someone?, but never says anything about it or them. And I have no idea why he thinks scum are so clever. Or who he thinks those clever scum are, other than saying he was suspicious of me because Chronos was. > > **Sangfroid** , if you are town, we need more than promises that you are looking closely. We need results and analysis of those close looks. Okay! This post I mostly agree with! I’m not sure it screams scum, but you’re right in it mostly saying nothing. \*\*Septimus \*\*an \*\*Chronos \*\* were \*\*HUGE \*\*losses. To “bounce” back at this moment will require a big effort of those of us town. > [@TexCat](#): > > On Plumpudding: > > I originally thought that Plumpudding was misguided town stuck in a Tex tunnel and unable to see anything outside. Then when he persisted and got more vehement, I thought he must be scum protecting scum!Septimus whose wagon was building. That was obviously not the case. > > I am back to the opinion that he is misguided townie, but have no idea how to get him out of the tunnel aside from my death. > > I am still mystified by how he can be so certain (and wrong) that I am scum on so little evidence. I do have a niggling suspicion that he is scum and is going to use this tunnel to avoid voicing opinions on anyone or anything else in the game. > > TL;DR I have no clue what’s up with Plum. :dubious: I might be misguided. We don’t have the luxury of a few expendable vanilla’s anymore, so even though I’m keeping my vote for now, I feel I will have to be a lot more sure than I was last day to go through with it, especially if other suspects appear. ---
**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:** [July 31, 2015, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/797 "2015-07-31T02:01:27Z")
After pleading for others to post a lot, I myself will be posting only a little over the next few days as I am covering for my boss at work while she is on vacation. I will still be reading several times a day. I was wondering if making a wild ass guess at who _all_ the wolves are would be a helpful tactic. Bear with me a moment. While most any wild guess would most surely be wrong, there are some suspects who lead to others (Example: If **Prof. Pepperwinkle** then **TexCat** …) There are people we each believe are town. (Example: My example here is **Bayard** , who probably would not have gone to all the trouble to write that long post with spoiler if he was wolf, IMHO). Thete ate players who, if we suppose them not guilty Then there are the people we don’t have a read on. The puzzle of this game is really determining five wolves, all of whom need to be exposed to win. ---
**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:** [July 31, 2015, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/798 "2015-07-31T02:03:32Z")
Sorry, meant to hit “preview” and instead hit “post.” Sucks playing this game from a phone. ---
**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:** [July 31, 2015, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/799 "2015-07-31T02:07:25Z")
There are players, if we posit them not guilty, then it makes others less likely to be guilty (Example: If **TexCat** is not guilty, then \*\*Prof. Pepperwinkle \*\* is not guilty). ---
**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:** [July 31, 2015, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/800 "2015-07-31T02:14:21Z")
I am not even sure if such a thing is worth doing this early in the game. Still, when I make a list of whom I think are surely town, and those whom I think are probably town, it leaves a number of players, many who must therefore be wolves. Looking at the whole problem may not result in anything worth posting, but it just might. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099.md?page=39) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099.md?page=41)