# 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:** 59
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2015, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1161 "2015-08-15T12:23:54Z")
> [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Let’s have at it, indeed! > \*\* > Vote Plumpudding\*\* > > Before I dive into the analysis, let me make one point clear. From here on out, unless something really weird happens, I am going to assume that **TexCa** t is Town. Yes, there is a small (8.3% baseline) chance that she could be the Alpha Wolf, but I don’t think we can afford to ignore the information our Seer has given us based on fear of an extremely unlikely event. And, as I demonstrated above, I don’t believe that the events of Day One are so otherwise inexplicable as to cause us to disregard the odds. I think it is perfectly possible, and in light of **Bayard’s** read overwhelmingly probable, that both the **septimus and TexCat** bandwagons on Day One were largely Town-driven, with the lucky scum only needing to nudge one or both to keep them rolling in the right direction. > > So, with the question I asked yesterDay in mind: looking at this vote count from Day One. > > I reviewed **Plumpudding’s** adventures on Day One, with special attention to interactions between him and people whose alignments are now confirmed. His scumminess lit up like a neon sign. > > **All Day, Plumpudding consistently did what would be most helpful to scum, at the time it was most helpful for them. > \*\* > Dante G took an early vote lead, and Plumpudding was all over that, aggressively attacking **Dante\*\* in multiple posts, although he left his actual vote parked discreetly as a one-off on** precambrianmollusc**. > > Then, when\*\* JSexton\*\* was in trouble with the vote count as above and the **Dante G** bandwagon fizzling,\*\* Plumpudding\*\* picked a Townie and dived in, launching an hysterical campaign of lies and misinterpretations against **TexCat** which occupied the rest of the Day. > > He never had a thing to say about **septimus** until he started attracting votes, offering another viable alternative to\*\* JSexton\*\*. At that point he suddenly decided **septimus** was also horribly scummy, and began directing almost as much flying spittle at him as at **TexCat** herself. Meanwhile, without ever coming out and saying he was opposed to lynching **JSexton** , he carried on a steady campaign of subtly defending him. > > That’s my case in a nutshell. Here is more detailed supporting data: Alright. I’ve gone back, quoted my and others relevant posts more or less chronologically, with some jumps forward in time to show context. > [@JSexton](#): > > Just to be clear, I’m strongly in favor of playing mafia. You know, since that’s the game we signed up for. Faffing around with trying to force ties for questionable results is not playing mafia, especially since the best thing we can do is hold people accountable for votes. Giving them reasons like “well, Chronos said we should engineer a tie” is counter productive. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Tiebreaking may potentially be an advantage. Arguing and reasoning, reading and interpreting will always be the core of mafia, and as I said, forcing ties probably won’t play a big part(werewolves would probably not want to do it, town should hopefully not have to do it). But any advantage is an advantage, and it’s good to keep in mind if it eventually has to happen. > > Edit: Frown upon me. Edited to say, I’m all for actually playing mafia. Voting and talking is how we will find werewolves. I can’t see how **Chronos** can give anyone reasons for not being accountable for their votes and posts. My first game interaction with **Jsexton**. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I do not see this as a problem at all. Scum will inevitably get to know what we plan anyway, and the more machinations from their side, the more slips to catch when they’re feeling safe. To be honest, the more we talk and force _them_ to talk, the better for us. Right now I don’t think they have much to talk about anyway. > [Snip]. Here I present what I tried and failed to do most of Day One. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > **Vote Precambrianmollusc** For this post, which makes it seem like he/she hasn’t read the thread, combined with frequency of posting about nothing interesting or arguing for surpressing discussion. > > I’ll change my vote if I get a satisfying explanation. And I agree that Dante G looks suspicious from whatever little we have gotten to know him. > > (Btw, is there any kind of multiquote system here?) Here are my reasons for my “one off” vote on **Precambrianmollusc**. I also comment on **Dante G** ’s posts. Was I really alone in thinking **Dante G** as suspicious? Seemed to me he was blundering most game, not adding a lot to any of the topics and mostly exusing himself and his way of playing. > [@septimus](#): > > Some have suggested that First Mason avoid voting for a Lynch leader to avoid getting involved in a Tie. But First Mason mustn’t carry that too far: Scum will be looking for a Townie who avoids voting for the Lynch leaders. > > So, IMO, the Masons should just vote as they would without considering tiebreaking. (Perhaps First Mason should lean _very slightly_ to tie avoidance toDay when votes are mostly random.) > > A big problem with Town trying to learn from ties is that Masons cannot reveal their deductions without outing themselves. And even if just one Mason (2nd or 3rd) reveals what he’s learned, that revelation will give clues to the identity of First Mason. But I strongly disagree with Chronos’ suggestion that First Mason reveal himself early. However I don’t suspect Chronos for thinking out loud: it would be rather brazen for a Wolf to make that suggestion! > > Similarly I accept Dante’s explanation: > > The “cryptic and telling” comment did seem very bizarre. But what could the Scum motive have been? Wolves aren’t making cryptic self-incriminatory remarks Day 1; they’re sitting in the corners laughing as Townies bloody each other. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I mostly agree with this, other than the importance of masons, and regular townies in general. > > This I don’t agree with. He has posted a total of seven posts in an already six page thread, not even reasonably explained himself, and five of his posts are in my record-keeping document already. If he’s town, fine, he in my opinion seems very confused, if he’s not there’s not a lot lost, no offense. Same goes for everyone right now. I’m keeping my vote for Precambrianmollusc for now, because some of his/her posts have also pinged me and I like to keep things a bit interesting, but I’m very tempted to change that. My first real interaction with\*\* Septimus\*\*. I told you guys pretty early that I was all for cracking an egg Day One. I still don’t see how that is pro-scum. We have cracked a few eggs too many, and some eggs way more important than others. Now we can’t afford to crack eggs anymore, if we’re to have any chance of winning this game. > [@JSexton](#): > > This is the sort of fake-analysis that scum tend to do. It looks relevant and thoughtful, but it’s actually a bland statement that literally applies to everyone in the thread so far. Worse, lynching townies is in fact a big loss. Not an insurmountable one, of course, but we don’t have an unbounded supply of warm bodies here. So why post such a vague bit of nonsense as a justification for a vote? Remember this post? > [@JSexton](#): > > No. You don’t get to switch to lurker mode when the pressure is on. > The game started 14-5, and is now 12-5. We’re fine. There’s absolutely no need to panic about numbers. I’ll post the rest of this interaction, just to show I’ve actually argued against him and he against me. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I’m not gonna lurk, I just can’t be here as much and I’ve explained why. > > Assuming we can lynch scum, yeah we’re fine. Do you find a perfect or near to perfect lynch-ratio by town from this day on a likely result? If not, then I think we agree that we should be as thorough as possible. > [@JSexton](#): > > But isn’t that the standard anyway? When are we NOT going to be careful and thorough. It’s non-advice. You might as well tell us to remember to convert oxygen into carbon dioxide with our lungs. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Do you think most Day One lynches are thorough and careful? Would _you_ still feel comfortable not even voting toDay? Do most Day One lynches result in a Guardian getting lynched? Do you think it is a good idea to be a bit more careful after such a day, especially since another power, already most likely town and a very active player got NK’d? > [@JSexton](#): > > Yes, given constraints imposed by lack of solid info. > > Loaded and misleading question. I did vote yesterDay, and my intention was to be voting at the end of the Day, but real life intervened. I certainly intend to be voting by the end of toDay as well. > > Of course not. > > No. We were sufficiently careful before, but it didn’t work out the way we hoped. That happens. The process is fine, and you can’t condemn it on the basis of a single outcome. > > (And it’s weird to me that you are panicking over an active player getting nightkilled. Because of course they were! What else did you expect? Scum were going to skip a nightkill? Kill a lurker? Kill the runner up in votes for us to save us some trouble? No, they do what they always do, kill active analysts that are unlikely to be lynched. That’s going to happen every night from here on out, so deep breath, get used to it.) > [@Plumpudding](#): > > In _this_ game, we’re also mostly new players adding an element of uncertainty and paranoia. “Ideal for beginners.” > > I see that. And I’m understanding of real life making make-believe arguing difficult. You didn’t vote, because you wanted to see how things were developing, then you got your hands full. I can see that and I’m sorry. > > So that’s one more extraordinary thing making this game even harder. Combined with the incident of the tie-breaker mechanic and it’s discussion, I wouldn’t call this a game “ideal for beginners” anymore. > > Okay. I don’t agree with the first sentence, but I do agree with the second half of the second sentence. I didn’t work out the way I hoped, but it did work out the way some of us, _town_, hoped, unless you think everyone voting for **septimus** was scum. And no, the process is never fine, it is never optimal and there will always be something to improve upon. One of those things, that I felt hampering and made me quite obsessive, was how lurking seemed to be defended. I took it too far, apparently, but you can’t possibly believe participation and substabtial input was divided evenly among players yesterDay. > > First of all, I’m not panicking. I don’t know where you’re getting that from. Second of all, if I would have, it would have been because that a second power-role, one that didn’t really get to show us the benefit of that, that was NK’d. Him being town, active and now dead just makes the game harder. They would have offed a town no matter what and probably someone that was on some kind of a trail of them. And here he abandons the argument and moves elsewhere. Okay, trying to refute **JSexton** and explaining why I’m not against cracking an egg Day One: > [@Plumpudding](#): > > You failed to include the part where I explicitly said that this goes for everyone in your quote. As you said, it applies to everyone, because we’re still on Day One. Also, I’m not using this as justification to vote for **Dante G** either, I’m still keeping my vote on **Precambrianmollusc** , so I’m not sure where you are getting that from. > > Right now, we have no more information to go on than whatever blunders people have managed to submit to the thread and some posters, me included, have blundered a bit more than others. That is, I’m not very sentimental about loosing a townie Day One, especially if there’s some information to gain by it later in the game. > > I also wanna say for the record, I’m actually not for engineering ties, I just want people to keep it in mind as a potentially viable tactic, and the more we discuss it, the more people will come to understand the ways it may be used. I then have a small interaction with\*\* Nonsuch\*\* that proved ultimately fruitless. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > **Jsexton** , I think you may be reading a bit too much into **Chronos** ’ vote. > [Snip] Trying to get a vote off **Chronos** , one of the few I was pretty sure was town. > [@septimus](#): > > [Snip] > > I’ve seen **Chronos** play as Scum and he’ll post much as he’s done in this game. The fact that he’s take-charge, posting pro-Town(?) advice is a null tell, IMO. > > [Snip] This is incidentally what I had against **Septimus** case; His insistence of bringing meta about\*\* Chronos\*\* into _this_ game. After this I voice some suspicions regarding **TexCat** , promted by **Chronos** ’ vote and we get into the self-vote business. I found **TexCat** ’s explanations lacking and her reactions pretty over-the-top mid-day Day One. Also,\*\* Malaloth\*\* vioces what I think many of us thought at that point: > [@Mahaloth](#): > > I’m really disappointed that we have to do this in a newcomer game. The idea of the game was to let newcomers experience the game in a very simple, basic setup. Then, for a reason I do not get, we have to have a new tie-break mechanism instead of just a standard one. > > I feel like a lot of newcomers will get the wrong impression of the game. > > I still think the rule for tie-breakers should just change/revert to the normal system. If not, we should host(I could mod) another newbie game right after this one. > > I’m surprised we went this route in a newbie game. I guess I can go along if we want, but now I’m not changing anything. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Unvote Plumpudding. > > I’m glad to see the plan abandoned. Even if it would have worked, it didn’t seem like a fun way to play, as I said some posts earlier. I’m gonna read through the last pages a couple of more times, think a little and come back to you guys later today. I had to split this post, as it was too long. ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2015, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1162 "2015-08-15T12:25:21Z")
> [@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. From toDay: > [@Plumpudding](#): > > [Snip] > Why do you feel it is good? I think this is what have bugged me this whole game: _Why_ do people feel like they feel, _why_ do people vote like they vote? Alot of you have very loudly stated that you are against of for _something_, but been very silent when asked _why_(this isn’t directed at you **Biotop** , you’ve been pretty forthcoming all game).[Snip] Back to Day One: > [@Chronos](#): > > [Snip] > **Plumpudding** , [your analysis of **TexCat**](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18538884&postcount=369) seems to have you suspicious of her; might you be persuaded to vote for her? > [Snip] > [@Plumpudding](#): > > OOG: Hi guys! I’ve been a bit silent lately, sorry for that. I’ve had a few busy days with some friends over, and yesterday we took a dutch guy for a sightseeing trip around Oslo. > > Anyway, I have posted quite a lot and shared more or less all my confused thoughts so far. Right now I’m hung over, and I need to read the last pages a couple of more times. > 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 finally get back to the game and place my third vote for the day on **TexCat**. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Two others that so far have failed to provide me with an answer: **Sario** and **Precambrianmollusc**. It doesn’t look sparkly clean to ignore posters who have an issue with what you post. In **TexCat** ’s case, she’s been selectively answering, and also seemed to be flinging and messing about for a while there, until the self-vote business began. These two haven’t actually answered at all. Something to keep in mind. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I don’t like this post. Why are you so eager to bring meta-gaming to the table? Who cares how **Chronos** has behaved in earlier games? And why are you suspicious of people who self-voted in general? I agree with **Chronos** in post [491](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18547576&postcount=491), this is a slippery slope and in itself not a good reason for suspicion, in my opinion. > I wanted to highlight this post. I agree, \*\*Septimus \*\*has been on my list for some time now. Something smells fishy. Here I voice my reasons for being supicious of\*\* Septimus\*\*, which never got answered. Snipped the middle of the quote. > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Even though I trust no one, **Biotop** looks pretty clean to me. I also believe \*\*Chronos \*\*is clean, although I had a few suspicions earlier on. Bringing in meta seems very uneccessary to me, and \*\*Chronos \*\*has been quite calm in his reponse to that from **Septimus**. **Thing Fish** and **Mahaloth** also seem to have towns best interests in mind. > > To everyone else, I’m not sure. Could go either way, though some are a bit more stinky than rosy. I’m actually a bit surprised at the case against **Jsexton**. Could anyone provide me with a few thoughts more on why he apparently seem so suspicious? Here I present my thoughts so far. I also asks for more explanations regarding **JSexton** , as I didn’t feel the case as very compelling. In post [500](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18547960&postcount=500)I address Septimus directly. And in post 501 I elaborate: > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Just to clarify, your reason regarding her votes, not your reason of her contributions being minimal. Because that is indeed very true. Not that I necessarily think your contributions have been all that. You took away a lot of heat on her when deciding to self-vote. And you never really made your case regarding that anyway, in my view seemingly stating you were both for and against, but mostly against because “ **Chronos** ”. Here I defend **Nonsuch** against **JSexton** : > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Yes, I agree. It either betrays the poster, **Prof. Pepperwinkle** , as set in his idea of you as scum against reason or logic, or him as taunting you… Or something? It does not betray a rationale behind the opinion. > This also doesn’t say much. > > And to **Nonsuch** ’s defense, **Jsexton** , he may not have been the most active, but I remember at least a few posts earlier with some substance out of seventeen, while **Prof. Pepperwinkle** has had twenty tries and not provided us with anything useful so far. My first vote, **Precambrianmollusc haven’t posted anything with substance at all, and managed to confuse people at the same time, and no one seems to be calling him out on anything. Johnny Bravo** is barely noticed. Since **Mahaloth** or anyone else never provided me with an elaboration of why they voted **JSexton** I posted this: > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Oh, Mahaloth, do you still have your vote on **JSexton** , **Mahaloth**? I don’t think it’s a great use of a vote, with all the other candidates out there. Could you be persuaded to forgo your vibe-tingle for another candidate? And I post this: > [@Plumpudding](#): > > Okay. > > New players, or players that are “busy, blabla”, could any of you please come forward with at least one substantial explanation for that. One explanation that might shed a bit more light than “I’m with the kids” or “We’re in the process of moving” or “I’m not used to this” or “Vacation”. It is closing in on night, day after day various people ask several times. It’s getting tiring. > > Apparently I post a lot when playing Forum Mafia, I’ll give you that. I \*talk \*a lot in general. Some people do not like playing with me because I make them feel worthless. What they fail to understand is that I also feel I am just as worthless, \*unless \*I talk. Unless I explain why I believe what I believe. I have made a guy so frustrated that he didn’t want to talk to me afterwards. Guys, it’s just a game, and I never flat out insults someone unless I am one hundred percent sure they are scum. They might not be, but if we’re at the end of a day, or closing in on the late game for that matter, what am I to believe. You’re not giving anything worthwhile to the discussion. Some players, some that right now refuse to provide answers to very direct questions, who also might be scum, try to hide among you. And you’re not helping us catch them unless you’re posting. We have no way of knowing anything about you, but we really need it! > > **Precambrianmollusc** , **Prof. Pepperwinkle** , **Dante G** , **sangfroid** , **Johnny Bravo** , **Cygnus42** , you all have under fifteen posts so far, some are more stinky than others, and there are posters **WAY** more stinky than \*you \*that posts much more, and thus have much more to answer for. Still, it would be extremely helpful if you chime in an explanation with bit more substance. And please feel free to share any more thoughts that enter your heads! Here is my misguided reading of **Septimus** and **TexCat** : > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I think \*\*Septimus \*\*may have envisioned a village where the tie-breaker might have been used by town as a threat and maybe one lynch, at best. It would give maybe a slight bump, if we could have continued to lynch at least some wolves the traditional way. But that would have required us to keep our numbers. The topic itself is diverting people already, and there’s ample opportunity to cofuse people, both veteran and newbie. Both him and \*\*TexCat \*\*have objected to revealing a mason or two, without ever explaining why. Both him and \*\*TexCat \*\*openly suggested to wait using the mechanic itself several times. How would that help town? And how is casting suspicions both ways at the same time helpful for the discussion? When prompted for an opinion they both seem to display a double-standard, saying both for and against in the same post. I think he got anxious, and needed a diversion for some heat on **TexCat** , who rode silently under most of it, and still hasn’t rebutted any points made against her. Now he seems to try to backpedal, and see if he can sow a little extra confusion while trying to stay out of heat. And me restating why I had a bug with them: > [@Plumpudding](#): > > I don’t know, it’s hard to know when they flat out ignore to provide answers. This needs to be restated because it’s true: > [@Mahaloth](#): > > Nope. Wolves would be most likely, I think, to lay low and\*\* go with the flow\*\*. Year of playing has taught me that lots of folks tend to lynch the loud and suggestive. Bolded for emphasis. And then we get to the end of Day One, my “misrepresentations”, “lies” and “sexual innuendo” directed at **TexCat** and a horrible Day One lynch. My case and explanation for my Day One play: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18559726&postcount=733](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18559726&postcount=733), [735](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18559765&postcount=735), [792](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18562306&postcount=792). I didn’t see any reason to answer **Bayard** , as I felt I’d already explained myself with those posts. > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Here are his posts relevant to those four lynch targets: > Attacking **Dante** , starting at a time when he had three votes and nobody else had more than one: 254, 256, 257, 293, 318. He then loses interest in **Dante** , only to circle back and declare himself satisfied “for now” in post 542 – immediately after **Dante** has placed the fifth vote on\*\* septimus\*\* > > In 369, he launches his first major offensive against **TexCat** , including saying that her statement that “people should vote for the scummiest” was “intended to promote baseless voting”. **TexCat** fired back, and he backpedaled and even apologized a little in post 400. I never backpedaled. I apologized and explained why she was misrepresenting me. Then I waited for an answer which I never got. > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > All this happened at a time when scum were not facing heat; **Chronos** was well in the lead and **JSexton** had only one vote on him. Perhaps he was picking out a Townie he could drive a wagon on in the future if needed, and wanted to get some suspicions on the record early, so he would look less scummy if he suddenly needed to attack her to draw town away from lynching scum later. Or possibly he had already decided to go all Fox News on **TexCat,** and planned out this interaction to set up the line he repeatedly used the rest of the Day; that the fact that he apologized the\* first\* time he told outrageous lies about **TexCat** proved that he was a reasonable and fair-minded chap, and therefore that his _current_ statements _aren’t_ outrageous lies. Outrageous lies? Where are my outrageous lies? Maybe I went a bit overboard, but she never addressed any of my points, or showed me why they were wrong. As shown above in this post, I went back to read the thread over, meanwhile **Chronos** asked me to act on my suspicions and I did. > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > But he didn’t mention her again until post 480, when the vote count was as above and he voted for her. Further attacks on **TexCat** ensued in 488. Now, suddenly, **septimus** picks up three quick votes and becomes a second possible alternative to **JSexton,** and in post 493\*\* Plumpudding\*\* heartily endorses **Johnny Bravo’s** case against **septimus**. This is somewhat tricky for him, as\*\* TexCat \*\*has already voted for **septimus,** but he is equal to the task, surmising that perhaps she is trying to throw him under the bus. Further spittle-laden attacks on **TexCat** and/or **septimus** ensue in posts 500, 529, 532, 534 (now pushing the theory that perhaps these two scum are the vote leaders because they are bussing each other!), 553, 569, 571, 572, 573, 580, 584, 585, 586, 590, 597, 611, and 615. **JSexton** was never under any heat. It was mid-day Day One. He had nothing to fear at that point. > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > Now let’s look at all o **f Plumpudding’s** mentions of\*\* JSexton \*\*on Day One. > > In post 272,\*\*\*\* JSexton\*\*\*\* criticizes **Plumpudding** for posting “a vague bit of nonsense as justification for a vote” and, unlike most everyone else to criticize \*\*Plumpudding, \*\*is NOT met with an hysterically defensive response, but simply ignored! > [@Plumpudding](#): > > You failed to include the part where I explicitly said that this goes for everyone in your quote. As you said, it applies to everyone, because we’re still on Day One. Also, I’m not using this as justification to vote for **Dante G** either, I’m still keeping my vote on **Precambrianmollusc** , so I’m not sure where you are getting that from. > > Right now, we have no more information to go on than whatever blunders people have managed to submit to the thread and some posters, me included, have blundered a bit more than others. That is, I’m not very sentimental about loosing a townie Day One, especially if there’s some information to gain by it later in the game. > > I also wanna say for the record, I’m actually not for engineering ties, I just want people to keep it in mind as a potentially viable tactic, and the more we discuss it, the more people will come to understand the ways it may be used. Did I ignore it? > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > In 364, he comments that **JSexton’s** case against **Chronos** “never won me over”. In 409, he asks **JSexton not to follow through on his threat to sub out if the tie-engineering plan catches on. In 497, he defends him against criticism by Prof P. in 516, he agrees with JSexton’s response to Pepperwinkle, and then goes on to attack** Pepperwinkle\*\*\*\* himself in 517. In 522, he asks **Mahaloth** why he is still voting for **JSexton**. In 571, addressing **septimus** regarding **JSexton** , he says “you and he are not in the same boat”. Well, true dat. In 600, he says that **JSexton** must have had a good reason for not voting. In 607, he asks **Mahaloth** what he thinks of **JSexton**. And in 632, he “implores” Bayard to move his vote off **JSexton.** None of these statements, taken one at a time, looks like much, but in aggregate, they paint a clear picture of a player determined to discourage the\*\* JSexton\*\* lynch without ever clearly saying so. I found their cases uncompelling, I had asked for more info on several occations, as shown in this post. I never got an answer. > [@Thing\_Fish](#): > > As far as other players, he also said negative things about **Bayard** (129), **Precambrian** (137, 254, 481, 533), **Sario** (305, 306, 481), **Pepperwinkle** (516, 517, 554), and **Chitwood** (625). In 131, he agrees with\*\*\*\* Biotop\*\*\*\* about a tiebreaking question. In 364, he said that **Chronos and Biotop** “look clean”. In 493, he repeats that and adds me **(Thing Fish) and Mahaloth** to the list. In 518, he says\*\* Chitwood\*\* is “on my good list”. In 544, he praises the contributions of **sangfroid.** In 571, he is “leaning town on **Nonsuch** ”. He makes two lists of people he accuses of lurking: 516 lists **Pepperwinkle, precambrian** , and\*\* Johnny Bravo\*\*, and specifically excludes **Nonsuch.** 523 keeps those three on the list and adds **Dante, sangfroid, and Cygnus42.** He never expresses an opinion directly on\*\* Johnny Bravo,\*\* but praises his case against **septimus** in 493 and 532. > > So there it is. I’ll start noosin’ up the rope, and dibs on the pelt. Why do you insist on using words like “praise”. I never praised anyone’s cases or posts. I either found them compelling, uncompelling or inbetween. You seem very inclined to use hyperbolic language to underline whatever point you think you have and I don’t think it helps your case. You’ve also called someone a “snit” and tried to peg me as a misygonist, which is ridiculous. (OOG: I’m leaning far left in the political spectrum of Norway. If there is one core value of mine, it’s equality.) I may be a loud asshat, I may be aggressive and I may have a difficult time making myself understood but those aren’t good reasons to lynch. If you lynch me, you’ll be two townies down tomorrow. ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1163 "2015-08-15T13:28:23Z")
From Nonsuch: > [@](#): > > And, just to get all my cards on the table, here’s something else I can’t get out of my head from Day 1: > > Quote: > Originally Posted by Prof. Pepperwinkle View Post > Agreeing with Bayard’s line of thought in #471. > > Vote JSexton > In the end, of course, he changed his vote first to TexCat, and then to septimus. On being questioned about this by Jimmy Chitwood: > > Quote: > Originally Posted by Prof. Pepperwinkle View Post > I had no idea. I was following the mob. > So in the first instance, we have a first vote that rubber-stamps another player’s, which he then changes — twice — to follow along with the group. > > And then, early in Day 2: > > Quote: > Originally Posted by Prof. Pepperwinkle View Post > Mea culpa. My bad. Oops. > > I didn’t understand why septimus, who was only one vote behind from TexCat, would unvote her, putting himself in jeopardy with only a very short time to go unless there was some scummy plan for a tie. Looking back, he was trying to shift the focus from TexCat to Dante G, but I goofed, and guessed wrong. I still don’t know what Cygnus was doing, there, which also heightened my groundless suspicions. > > Consequently, since he can’t: > > vote Dante G. > Pepperwinkle did not originally vote for Dante G. So what was this vote for — a tribute to septimus? Why trust septimus’ vote, particularly? I mean, maybe there is a reason; I just don’t know what it is. > > Does this indicate a pattern of scummy behavior? Maybe, maybe not. To me, it indicates a pattern of either blatantly piggybacking on other players or else trying to fly whichever way the wind is blowing — and I am less and less inclined to trust it. Yes, it’s my first game and I have been piggybacking, following the mob, etc. The vote for DanteG was a tribute vote for septimus since I was part of his downfall. I’m sorry I didn’t stick with JSexton, but hindsight is greater than foresight. ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1164 "2015-08-15T15:09:02Z")
> [@Plumpudding](#): > > I may be a loud asshat, I may be aggressive and I may have a difficult time making myself understood but those aren’t good reasons to lynch. If you lynch me, you’ll be two townies down tomorrow. **PlumPudding** , I am **not** going to vote for you toDay. I think you are town. I hope you continue to play and push for the candidates you think are scum. We can still win this thing. But, and I say this in the spirit of good will, please remember that if we lynch you and another townie, then **WE** will be down two townies. The “you’ll” in your post bothers me because my theory in this game has always been that if I die, it is a shame but _if the town ultimately wins_ it doesn’t matter whether I cross the finish line dead or alive. Our town dead so far each have posted a final “goodbye” in that spirit. I fight for them because they can no longer play. But they can still win! I did feel a bit bad for **TexCat** on day 1, and I accept that I allowed that feeling to influence my vote. I am trying to operate now purely on reason, but alas one of the pitfalls of this game is after a while you start feeling that you are getting to know certain players, and you don’t want them to go down. I don’t want you to get lynched. ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2015, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1165 "2015-08-15T15:36:29Z")
> [@Biotop](#): > > **PlumPudding** , I am **not** going to vote for you toDay. I think you are town. I hope you continue to play and push for the candidates you think are scum. We can still win this thing. > > But, and I say this in the spirit of good will, please remember that if we lynch you and another townie, then **WE** will be down two townies. The “you’ll” in your post bothers me because my theory in this game has always been that if I die, it is a shame but _if the town ultimately wins_ it doesn’t matter whether I cross the finish line dead or alive. > > Our town dead so far each have posted a final “goodbye” in that spirit. I fight for them because they can no longer play. But they can still win! > > I did feel a bit bad for **TexCat** on day 1, and I accept that I allowed that feeling to influence my vote. I am trying to operate now purely on reason, but alas one of the pitfalls of this game is after a while you start feeling that you are getting to know certain players, and you don’t want them to go down. I don’t want you to get lynched. The “you’ll” was meant as you as a group of voters. You go down two townies, we get closer to loosing. I am happy you won’t vote for me toDay, and I will try to find a good place to put my vote. Right now I feel participation is severly lacking and that is making our job quite a bit more difficult. Regarding **Thing Fish** , his case is pretty good, but he’s overlooking the context in which things were happening. **TexCat** had it right yesterDay: > [@TexCat](#): > > JSexton himself did not seem too worried about being lynched on Day One. It’s hard to believe that his wolf buddies were panicking when he wasn’t. He wasn’t under any real heat. It was in the middle of Day one and absolutely anything could happen. In hindsight I may have been too aggressive towards \*\*TexCat \*\*and **Septimus** , and I may not have pushed **JSexton** hard enough, but I lacked the knowledge then that we now have. And again, if I get lynched I hope that will give you guys something more to work with, although it may be too late. **TexCat** , you have several times said you believe I’m a misguided asshole townie. If you still feel there’s a chance of that, do you think your vote on me is a good use of your vote? I think we agree on atleast one thing; we need to find scum. Are you certain enough of me being scum to risk loosing a town? To all players inactive: We need your input. Please voice your opinions. And finally, Biotop, I appreciate your player analyses. ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1166 "2015-08-15T15:57:59Z")
**Sangfroid** Weird. I look for my notes on **Sangfroid** on Day1, and I have nothing. It’s not that he did not post (though he did not post a lot), it’s just that I could not get any kind of a read from any of it. I guess that’s a wash but “no information” bothers me. Post #732: **Sangfroid** posits that we have some “crafty adversaries” with expertise at finding power roles. I respond that I do not understand this in #738, and **Sangfroid** disagrees with my response in #739. Now my first thought on this was it reeked of “self congratulation,” but after considering more I do not think a wolf would make such an obvious slip. And in post #752, wolf **JSexton insinuates Sangfroid** has “inside knowledge.” Why would he do that to a fellow wolf? So I am going to give **Sangfroid** a pass on all this. Post #856: I don’t understand the “sacrificial lamb” comment but it makes no sense to me as either as a wolf post or as a town post, so again it is a wash. Post #899: I like this post in that has substance. States he is town and hopes he can leave information if he is killed off. I don’t particularly agree with the actual accusations in the post, but I think it is a Town post. Post #1137 Sangfroid volunteers himself as a martyr. Can’t see a wolf doing that. Okay, I sure wish I had more to go on to make any kind of accurate verdict, but if we take this in that spirit: \*\* Verdict: Undecided (but leaning Town)\*\* ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2015, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1167 "2015-08-15T16:07:03Z")
I just wanted to throw some comments on your analyses, **Biotop** , before I leave my computer for the evening. > [@Biotop](#): > > (Note, I just realized I am out of alphabetical order on this post, but I am going with it anyway. My wife is on the way home and when she finds out I have spent the whole day on Mafia and not the yard, I may be lynched!) > > Last one for a while: > > **Prof. Pepperwinkle** > > Post #84: He asks how many wolves are in the game, something he would already know if wolf. I admit he may have conjured this question as wolf to start a conversation, but I don’t really believe that. > > Post #361: Puts in a good word for the tie-breaking scheme that helps town. > > Post #479: votes for **JSexton** , putting him in real danger. Town points. > > Post #509: Ragged on by **JSexton**. More town points. > > Post #1052: Posts helpful odds I requested. > > Post #1059: Argues that new players in a new game might well have new interpretations of the “spirit of the game.” Pro-town. > > If\*\* TexCat\*\* is town, then his last minute switch to **septimus** on Day 1 is seemingly innocent. > > **Verdict: Town** I think my biggest gripe with the Prof. is how he never really substantiates or argues for his votes. He agrees or comes with a one-liner and that’s it. But I do not see that as a good enough reason to vote for him toDay. > [@Biotop](#): > > If I ever play this game again, I am going to have to find a way to keep better notes. I have pages and pages of scribbles, some even incomprehensible to me! > > But I am still going to try and organize a few of my thoughts and post them— probably over several posts today and tomorrow. > > So to begin: > > * * * > > **Cygnus42** : > > Some ProTown Posts/indications: > > #291-- Says he doesn’t think **Dante G** ’s mis-speak on “tipping sides” was a scum slip. Why would a wolf help a townie in such a situation? Better to say nothing. Even though \*\*Cygnus 42 \*\*is eventually won over to a suspicion of Dante G, this first post strikes me as honest. > > #455 – **JSexton** insinuates **Cygnus42** is scum. We all know what **JSexton** was. > > #459 – Votes for **JSexton** and says he thinks he “has a general sense of scumminess”. **Cygnus42** is right. > > #646: Unvotes **septimus** after he is revealed to be the Guardian. He does so at the last minute when others theoretically could be doing the same. Why risk what is a great outcome for scum? > > #704: Still voicing suspicions of \*\*JSexton. > \*\* > #852: Still posting anti- **JSexton** opinion. > > **Verdict: Town** > > * * * > > much more to come… > [@TexCat](#): > > **Biotop** , I agree wholeheartedly with the Cygnus read. Cygnus is pretty much confirmed town to me after the Sexton flip. Prof P also voted for JSexton on Day 1, but didn’t really seem to have his heart in it, and therefore I haven’t given him the town cred that I gave Cygnus. I don’t see anything to disagree with Diggit and Chitwood reads, but I did not pay much attention to them on my reread. [Snip] These two posts I agree with and I’ve said so earlier. \*\*Cygnus42 \*\*looks town to me. I am also not gonna push for you, **TexCat**. You may be alpha, but the chance of that is pretty low. I don’t think there’s a harm having you with us further into the game. > [@Biotop](#): > > **Precambrianmollusc** > > A few notes on this player. > > \*Post #135: Says he is suspicious of people who say wolves would not want benefit from a tie. As the rules were first described, the tie-breaker was quite pro-town. But being wrong is not necessarily a wolf trait, and intentionally making a bad argument isn’t a smart wolf play. Better to say the tie-breaker is “not in the spirit of the game.” So undecided on this post. I feel like it is more likely a town opinion. But just barely. > > \*Post #148: Almost seems to dismiss reason as a weapon against wolves. Hmmm… > > \*Post #358: Ok, we know why **JSexton** said he did not vote the first round. Server problems at work requiring his attention. Lots of people had excuses the first day why they are not posting and drawing attention. Moving and boxes this time for this player. Whether true or not, these excuses were sure convenient. > > \*Post #411: Helpful post explaining his feelings across the board. I like such posts because they can be revealing— so I don’t think wolves probably make them so much. Town points. > > \*Post #467: Okay, I don’t want to get all wound up over reasons for not staying around for a lengthy discussion…but “beer o’clock”?..REALLY? “Beer o’clock?” And more talk of how the pro-town plans were helpful to scum? Hmmm… > > \*Post #658: Votes too late. Beer o’clock absence of nearly three days. Yet he arrives just in time to participate 20 minutes too late. What are we to think? > > \*Post #750: Wants to know why **Mahaloth** is voting for **JSexton** … something \*\*Mahaloth \*\*has already explained before. Hmm… **Mahaloth** patiently explains his reasons again in post #754. > > \*Posts #785-786: Agrees with **Johnny Bravo** ’s suspicions on **Thing Fish** in the whole “protecting septimus” brouhaha. **JSexton** will later quote **Precambrianmollusc** ’s post #785 and disagree with him. Why is **JSexton** here at all? Someone in all this “protecting septimus” chatter besides **JSexton** almost has to be a wolf, IMHO. But whom? > > \*Post #887: Seems still suspicious of **JSexton**. A town point. > > \*Post #1001: This sure got my attention (as well as **DiggitCamara** ). The reasoning behind putting off a lynch on **JSexton** is not clear to me. I don’t understand this whole post. Posts #1011 and #1012 don’t clear it up much for me. That said, would a wolf really post this way? I don’t understand what is going on with these posts at all. \*\*Minus points everywhere!!! > \*\* > \*#1033: Says he will be voting for **DiggitCamara** on the nextDay because of how **DiggitCamara** reacted to post #1001. I think **DiggitCamara** had a right to feel as he did, so this seems retaliatory and not helpful to town. > > \*Post#1091: Responded to my “Plan Bluff” bait, which in my mind is a pro-town post for **Precambrianmollusc**. > > _Post #1120: Okay, this post is very town-indicative. He says that the PM post by **PlumPudding** would not say “originally posted by storyteller” at the top. **TexCat** corrects him a few minutes later. IF **Precambrianmollusc** is wolf and Plumpudding is town, then this posting makes no sense. Why would a wolf make up a meta reason that would easily be disproved? But a townie might post this without thinking it through or trying it out because it seemed an “A-HA” moment. So is he town after all? > \*\* > Precambrainmollusc_\* was on my short “very likely wolf” list before post #1120. He was missing in action at critical times on Day 1 and also was on Bayard’s list of those not really talking directly with\*\* JSexton\*\*. So now… > > **Verdict: Undecided (but leaning wolf)** **Precambrianmollusc** has been wrong about nearly every topic he’s voiced an opinion about. He’s presented the unlikeliest possibilities and continued to argue them after being corrected. I’m very unsure about him, but I find it strange. Alright, see you later. ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1168 "2015-08-15T16:50:14Z")
**Sario** I have been harder on Sario than I probably should have for non-participation, but he was the fifth player to sign up for the game and in post #28 he expressed excitement at playing. So what are we to make of the absences? Post #357: Objects to tie-breaking scheme as 'not mafia." Fair enough. Post #410: Votes for **Chronos** because he ( **Sario** ) does not like the tie-breaking scheme. Not so fair —nor in the best interest of the town— especially as I believe wolves were looking for a reason to go after our experienced players. Post #494: Unvotes **Chronos** and votes **septimus**. Guess it is positive that he unvoted **Chronos** , but this was after even **JSexton** said a vote for \*\*Chronos \*\*made no sense. Post #657: True enough!🙂 Post #919: After a long absence\*\* Sario\*\* turns up to announce he will not be voting on Day2. **JSexton** did not vote on Day1. Hmmm… Says he will drop out and asked to be replaced if he cannot find time to play. Post #946: But enough free time to come in and post fluff during the night, playing off a post of … **JSexton**. Post #1045 Seems miffed at me for checking his profile to find when he last logged in to SDMB . But I was getting desperate for some information. However, in the spirit of fairness I have not done it again and I am sorry if that was out of line. Post #1048: More substance. Thank you. However, the comment that somehow **TexCat** is _less likely_ to be wolf because **JSexton** _was_ wolf does not make sense to me. What has one to do with the other? Sure I think **TexCat** is less likely to be wolf because she was investigated and called Town, but that has zero to do with **JSexton** being wolf. The night investigations by **Bayard** were independent events. (I read a joke once where someone said to be safe he always carried a bomb on a plane, because while the odds of having one bomb on a plane were small, the odds of two bombs were just astronomical. That’s the same type of thinking). #1064: Expressed an opinion on my fake “Plan B.” Town points. There was so little to work with. I understand **Sario** ’s objection to any vote-rigging scheme as “not Mafia,” but lurking and not voting are also “not Mafia” in my book (but hey, what do I know, this is my first game). Or at least they are not “Town Friendly Mafia.” But I suppose a wolf might well play that way. **Verdict: Undecided (But leaning heavily wolf)** ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1169 "2015-08-15T17:25:56Z")
**Plum(3)**: ThingFish[1114], Texcat[1118], JohnnyB[1142] **Mollusc(1)**: Diggit[1129] **Diggit(1)**: Chitwood[1132] Not Voting: Biotop, Cygnus, Nonsuch, Plum, Mollusc, Prof, Sangfroid, Sario Is this really all the votes that we have so far? ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1170 "2015-08-15T17:29:23Z")
Well, I’m waiting for Biotop to finish his series of analyses before casting mine. They make great sense to me so far. ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1171 "2015-08-15T17:57:22Z")
Re: **Sario** I agree there is almost nothing to work with. The one post that stood out for me was his vote on Day One. > [@Sario](#): > > After re-reading, I find myself agreeing with the case against **septimus**. This could be a problem because if I vote for him now it will look like I’m hopping on the bandwagon. > > Looks like that’s a risk I’ll have to take > > **Unvote Chronos** > > **Vote septimus** He seems worried about the wrong thing here. As town, I’m always worried that I’m making the right decision. I voted Septimus, but worried whether he was really scum, or whether it was just that he always seems to look like scum to me. Sario seems to be more worried about he’s going to look than whether he’s making the right vote or not. ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1172 "2015-08-15T20:06:33Z")
I’m going with my gut here. **Thing Fish’s** argument against **Plumpudding** is sound, but my instinct, for what it’s worth, is telling me he’s Town. I went after **Pepperwinkle** , but I’m not ready to pull the trigger on him yet. And while there are other players worth taking a look at, this is what’s pinging my scumdar today. **vote Precambrianmollusc** ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1173 "2015-08-15T21:58:10Z")
**TexCat** So how can I add anything to what has already been posted about **TexCat**? Unlike the other players, the only question on **TexCat** is whether she is the Alpha. So let’s look at that. In post #1114 **Thing Fish** claims the probability that **TexCat** is Alpha is only 8.3%. I dispute that. **TexCat** was singled out for suspicion because of her wolfish response to a plan _that was designed primarily to find the Alpha Wolf!_ I didn’t single her out. Experienced player **Chronos** did. He who was lynched on the very first night. Now of course **Chronos** could be wrong, but to determine the odds of **TexCat** ’s chances at being Alpha simply as compared to picking a random player would be illogical thinking. And **Bayard** did not investigate her on a whim either. He did it because he thought she might be wolf. There was a case for that. That said, I don’t think it necessarily means that **TexCat** is Alpha. It’s just that we can’t dismiss it as so low a probability as \*\*Thing Fish \*\*does. I assume most players are taking the time to follow the post # arguments several players have been making regarding **TexCat**. I don’t think it is necessary to list them all again. Here are my reasons for thinking TexCat is not Alpha: 1. Post #337: If **TexCat** was Alpha, how could she make the mistake of posting the comment about our Seer investigating Alpha the first night? She has played this game before. She would be well aware of her invisibility to the Seer if she had been given the role. If she is Alpha she would not be throwing anyone off the scent by posting this because she was only being suspected of being Wolf at the time. Maybe she could look ahead and figure out that she might be investigated later and this would throw everyone off. Do you believe that? I don’t. If ANYONE suspecting TexCat can give me a good reason why an Alpha would make this post, I’m all ears. 2. Post #577: Her vote for **Plumpudding** strikes me as innocent person striking out in the only way she can. Why would a wolf do this? 3. Post #1061: She does not think my phony Plan B violates the “spirit of the game”. I think that is a town post, and the sort of thing I was hoping to get when I made up the whole Plan B thing. Maybe she saw through me, but maybe not. Town points. So here’s my assessment. Without a Seer investigation **TexCat** would still be high on my Wolf list. But I can’t see how she could be Alpha and make some of the posts she has. The probability of **TexCat** as Alpha is not anywhere as low as 8.3%, but it is still as low as others I have been willing to call town. Therefore: **Verdict: Town** ---
**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:** [August 15, 2015, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1174 "2015-08-15T22:16:05Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > Well, I’m waiting for Biotop to finish his series of analyses before casting mine. They make great sense to me so far. Thanks **Prof. Pepperwinkle**. I was hoping I was not being off-putting by posting so much. That said, remember I am a newbie who is just flailing around. If you are a newbie Town then you have just as much chance of making good deductions as I do. And I want to hear your thoughts! We all do. Indeed I wish I was experienced so that I could have some idea if what I am posting is worth anything or not. Guess I will learn eventually. Indeed, if some of the more experienced Town posters want to make cases for or against various players, their wisdom will likely be superior to mine. I do have one advantage though. I think everyone knows I am Town! Well…almost everyone. ---
**Author:** ![sangfroid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e0b2c6/32.png) [@sangfroid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sangfroid)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2015, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1175 "2015-08-16T03:59:03Z")
> [@Biotop](#): > > **Sangfroid** > > Weird… 😃 I don’t often use “LOL”, but I certainly did at that! Thanks for the laugh, **Bio**. Yep, pretty much describes me in a nutshell… First, thanks for all your hard work and analysis, **Bio**. I really suck at that sort of thing. Any time I’ve attempted it, it seems I just end up confusing everyone in the process. Second, you’re correct in your (leaning toward) Town assumption, as I too just want to win for our dearly departed comrades. Means nothing in and of itself, of course, but you deserve a hearty pat on the back for your efforts. Third, all I can say at the moment is that I am understandably wary of anyone who tossed my name out there just to see if it would stick - an easy lynch, maybe - a minimal poster easily dismissed as no great loss if done so “accidentally”. Oops. **Dante** being a notable exception to those who named me. Not sure why, but even though he tagged me early on, I never voted him, even when the pile-on started. Something just didn’t feel right. I _was_ ready to pile on **Cat** , though, as were quite a few others until the reveal by the Seer. That whole sequence of events still bugs me too. The seer investigated **Cat** for a reason(s), as noted elsewhere. I’m willing to give **Cat** a pass for now if that’s how the rest of you feel about it, and it seems that’s how it’s going to play out for the time being. I’m still hearing the ghost of **Chronos** on the breeze for some reason, though. Regarding toDay’s vote, I need to keep rereading for a bit and decide. **Bio** and **Thing** have made some good points and put quite a bit of effort into sorting information out and I want to give it all due diligence. ---
**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:** [August 16, 2015, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1176 "2015-08-16T04:20:12Z")
Let me second (third?) the comment above: Thanks for all these analyses, **Biotop**. It helps to have all this stuff in one place. ---
**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:** [August 16, 2015, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1177 "2015-08-16T05:42:29Z")
**Thing Fish** I am going to focus a lot on the posts of **Thing Fish** during Day1, probably more so than any other player. I am doing this because I don’t know exactly what to make of it all, and I hope others will comment. I do not want to make the same “conspiracy theory” mistake I made with **septimus** on Day1. Indeed, perhaps instead of reading all this, folks could reread all the Day1 posts now that we know **JSexton** was a wolf, and that **Chronos** would be their first night target. My choices below are cherry-picked, and I quite acknowledge **Thing Fish** made many very helpful and insightful comments on Day1 and indeed throughout this game. * * * Post #232: Disagrees with **JSexton** on whether **Chronos** said we should engineer a tie. Post #240: Says “sorry” to **JSexton** and votes for **Chronos**. He is the first to do so. Posts #244, 245, 247, 275: All helpful posts analyzing the tie-breaker. Makes many more such posts on Day 1. Post# 277: **Thing Fish** is praised by **JSexton** for his analysis and awarded “townie points.” Post #321: Analyzes the dispute between **Chronos** and **JSexton** over snipped posts. Comes down on **Chronos’** side. Though there are dashes of accusations against **Chronos** here as well. Post #346: **JSexton** unvotes **Chronos** based on the obvious fact that the various rigged tie-breaking plans are pro-town. Post #352: **Thing Fish** reasonably appeals to storyteller to change the tie-breaking rule. Posts #373, #376, #377, #381: He still believes **Chronos** is scum despite the vote rigging plan, though he believes my original plan had “real advantages.” Defends **JSexton** against suspicions of Jimmy Chitwood. Post #398: Unvotes **Chronos** and votes for himself in **septimus** organized tie-breaker. Post #422: Nice post analyzing the tie breaker and why it would be good on Day1. Pro-Town. Post #433: Votes for\*\* Sario\*\* for several reasons, including that he “smudged” **Plumpudding**. Post #464: Declares that he believes **septimus** and I are town, but is \*still \*unsure of **Chronos**. Post #591: Returns and unvotes **Sario** , then votes for **TexCat**. No more posting until the end of Day1 * * * Post #715: The “Clusterfuck” Post. Very interesting and full of helpful information. This took time to create and is very well thought out. On the other hand, if we believe that **TexCat** is Town as is **septimus** , then the whole horrible ending of day 1 is just a huge town screw-up with wolves laughing at us. And I think that’s what we believe now, isn’t it? That said, at the time I thought much of what **Thing Fish** was posting here was dead-on and that **TexCat** was wolf. So how can I fault \*\*Thing Fish \*\*for thinking that? Post #717: Can’t argue at all with **Thing Fish** ’s very negative response to **Plumpudding** ’s ill-advised “exhilerating” comment. I was disturbed by it too. Post #718: **Precambrianmollusc** votes for **Thing Fish** because of the “protect **septimus** ” comment. There is some back and forth on this topic involving several players. Post #753: **JSexton** praises **Thing Fish** for “quality” Post#715. Post #793: **JSexton** weighs in on the 'protecting **septimus**" commentary and indirectly defends **Thing Fish**. Post #893: **Thing Fish** defends **JSexton**. Post #991: Votes for **JSexton** after the **Bayard** reveal. No hesitation. Posts #1031, #1032: I agree with most of the thinking here, except for the part about **Jimmy Chitwood** and **Prof. Pepperwinkle** being suspicious. Post #1038: Good analysis of\*\* JSexton\*\*'s praising of his “Clusterfuck” posting. Post #1042: Says we should be cautious in interpreting **JSexton** ’s posts. He is right, of course. Post #1114: The **Plumpudding** accusation, well thought out —though I currently believe it too be wrong. Posts #1126, #1127: These seem a bit over the top and not in keeping with the usual reasoned **Thing Fish** posts. See, I just don’t believe \*\*Plumpudding \*\* simply copied his “supposed” PM off storyteller’s post #50. Sure **Plum** _could_ have, but once he saw how easy it is to do (if he was indeed wolf), I don’t think he would have thought he could just slip that past us and we’d just say “OK.” But I sure can see **Plum** posting his PM as a “proving” defense without realizing it could be copied from post #50. **Plum** ’s play has been a lot of things, but I don’t think I would call it “crafty.” * * * I have been dreading all day trying to sum up my feelings on **Thing Fish**. His case pro or con is the hardest of all for me to read. I am disturbed by all the praising from **JSexton** and some mutual defending. But on the other hand, **Thing Fish** has been a prolific player never timid to post as I imagine many wolves might be. **Thing Fish** has been wrong at times (as have I and others) but he is not afraid to admit when he has been wrong. There are so many other **Thing Fish** posts to go over, and they are almost always reasoned and usually seem sincere. I want to be fair to **Thing Fish** because I know I tended to point out here what seem to me are the more problematic posts while not commenting on many good ones. **JSexton** is probably too smart a player to praise another wolf so much --though **Thing Fish** is the player most praised by our known wolf and I gotta say it does bug me. Maybe **JSexton just wanted to get on the good side of a smart town player in Thing Fish. I never mentioned the posts where Thing Fish is suspicious of Cygnus42 after Cygnus’ last second attempt to save septimus**. I think **Cygnus** is very likely town and I am hard-pressed to see this action as suspicious. I only wish I could have unvoted **septimus** in time. As **Thing Fish** said about me in post #715, I will now say about him: “Who the hell knows.” **Verdict: Undecided** ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2015, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1178 "2015-08-16T12:03:38Z")
> [@sangfroid](#): > > [Snip] > That whole sequence of events still bugs me too. The seer investigated **Cat** for a reason(s), as noted elsewhere. I’m willing to give **Cat** a pass for now if that’s how the rest of you feel about it, and it seems that’s how it’s going to play out for the time being. > > I’m still hearing the ghost of **Chronos** on the breeze for some reason, though. > > [Snip]. I would think **Bayard** investigated \*\*TexCat \*\*to confirm her as town: > [@Bayard](#): > > [Snip] > I continue to think **TexCat** is town. > [Snip] **Chronos** knew **TexCat** weren’t a mason and he felt she posted scummy. That’s it. Yes, he’s an experienced player and maybe he was onto something, but we can’t be sure about that right now. With **TexCat** showing up as town in **Bayard** ’s read, we now know she can either be town or alpha, and her likelyhood of being town has increased by a lot. Without the seer the alpha is a wolf with tie-breaking power and that’s it. So even if \*\*TexCat \*\*is alpha, I think it is better to leave her for now to not risk lynching a town, and revisit her case later if we need to. ---
**Author:** ![Plumpudding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Plumpudding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Plumpudding)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2015, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1179 "2015-08-16T13:03:48Z")
I decided earlier to put my post-count stat-keeping on hold, as no one seemed interested. ToDay’s incredibly low activity prompted me to do a count of today. Biotop IIIII IIIII IIIII IIII 19 Plumpudding IIIII IIIII 10 Texcat IIIII III 8 Thing Fish IIIII II 7 Jimmy Chitwood IIIII 5 Nonsuch IIIII 5 Prof. Pepperwinkle IIIII 5 DiggitCamara III 3 Precambrianmollusc III 3 sangfroid III 3 Cygnus42 I 1 Johnny Bravo I 1 Bayard(Dead) I 1 Sario 0 So far we have only 71 posts toDay! Our most active player toDay, **Biotop** , has posted more than the eight lowest-activity players combined. This has been a problem every Day; activity is very uneven among our players. ToDay is even worse, with low activity all around. How are we supposed be catching wolves in silence? ---
**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:** [August 16, 2015, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099/1180 "2015-08-16T13:11:48Z")
I have a 12 hour shift at the mill today (time to pay the piper for my past two days off). I hope others will keep a conversation going because I have no idea who to vote for toDay and we pretty much have to get it right to have a realistic chance to win. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099.md?page=58) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-game-ideal-for-beginners-game-in-progress/725099.md?page=60)