# Sdmb mafia **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [October 30, 2008, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198 "2008-10-30T02:29:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 29
**Author:** ![DiggitCamara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@DiggitCamara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DiggitCamara)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/561 "2008-11-07T03:09:05Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > ok11, are you new, or do you have experience elsewhere (or do you have a different screenname elsewhere)? Just curious. > > Anyway, I’m not much of a fan of magic bags either, but I’m willing to let this one slide–on one condition. Diggit. You never said _when_ your role is confirmable. If it’s confirmable by Tommorow, then you’re fine not revealing it, because if you don’t, we lynch you. OTOH, if it’s a gradual confirmation process, please tell us, because if you don’t, and you’re not confirmed Tommorow, we’re going to lynch you. > > I don’t thing Og said anything to that effect. I think it should be confirmable by toMorrow. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/562 "2008-11-07T03:10:52Z")
> [@Hawkeyeop](#): > > It was. I had interpreted that to mean that it was worth a shot asking, but that Og wasn’t going to answer, in other words: he ain’t tellin’. And ok11, I’m actually kinda surprised by that. You sound more experienced. ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/563 "2008-11-07T03:19:59Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > I had interpreted that to mean that it was worth a shot asking, but that Og wasn’t going to answer, in other words: he ain’t tellin’. > And ok11, I’m actually kinda surprised by that. You sound more experienced. I interpreted it the same way. And now I see that admitting I’m a newbie was a mistake, because scum turns into sharks at the smell of fresh blood 😃 **DiggitCamara** , I said I’d _probably_ have to unvote you out of _caution_. I never said I believed your claim, or that I stopped getting a scummy vibe from you. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/564 "2008-11-07T03:34:01Z")
> [@DiggitCamara](#): > > I think it should be confirmable by toMorrow. Good enough for me. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/565 "2008-11-07T03:35:37Z")
At this point I’ll admit I’m voting on you as a failsafe–of the three frontrunners, you’re the most scummy-sounding to me. Nanook we can cope with because he’s easy to prove a liar. Diggit says he should be confirmable by toMorrow. You are neither. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/566 "2008-11-07T03:36:56Z")
my last addressed to NBC, somehow it ate the quoted portion of my post. ---
**Author:** ![DiggitCamara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@DiggitCamara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DiggitCamara)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/567 "2008-11-07T03:45:54Z")
> [@ok11](#): > > I was expecting a flurry of posts overnight. This is disappointing. > > **Nanook of the North Shore** is so far ahead in votes that he’ll (almost) definitely be banned if the day ends at the 72 hour mark. **Pedescribe** said we can’t risk letting **Nanook of the North Shore** use a megapower. If he had a megapower that relied on him staying alive via unique votes, I still think he’d keep his mouth shut today after someone had already voted for him. Then he’d be able to use the power at night, and not be in as much danger of being banned. Yes, I know, WIFOM. > > If the day lasts longer than 72 hours, could we discuss the possibility that **Nanook of the North Shore** , if not pro town or PFK, could also be a Jester type role? In that case, he made a brilliant move. > > Moving on. **NaturalBlondChap** , is that a role claim? Also, since you bring up screen names, who wants to talk about those? Or is that anti-town in some way? > > I think **Kat** ’s justification for voting **zeriel** is good. **Zeriel** , what do you think about [post 435](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10407772&postcount=435) by **Hero From Sector 7G**? > > Finally, I’ll vote to > **Ban DiggitCamara** > For the reasons I’ve already outlined. Recap: no vote at the 48-hour deadline, very little participation, and 2 CMs voted for him and no one tried to get a band wagon rolling. > [@ok11](#): > > I interpreted it the same way. And now I see that admitting I’m a newbie was a mistake, because scum turns into sharks at the smell of fresh blood 😃 > > **DiggitCamara** , I said I’d _probably_ have to unvote you out of _caution_. I never said I believed your claim, or that I stopped getting a scummy vibe from you. “Scummy vibe”? You were voting for me because of no 48-hour deadline, little participation and 2 CMs voting for me (because it… didn’t turn into a bandwagon). 1. I have been participating a bit more (after being prodded) 2. I submitted a vote (there are others who haven’t voted yet) 3. The movement against me picked up steam and did turn into a bandwagon So: your original reasons to vote for me have been effectively erased. I added a claim (Administrator) which, in previous discussions, had been identified as a probably valuable role (which it is, btw). You added a reason (which other players came up with). You’ll excuse me if I think that you’re not exactly being straightforward yourself. I’ll keep my vote on you. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/568 "2008-11-07T04:00:37Z")
amrussel and Total Lost: what do you think of NBC? About Diggit’s partial claim? ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/569 "2008-11-07T05:12:48Z")
> [@DiggitCamara](#): > > You’ll excuse me if I think that you’re not exactly being straightforward yourself. I’ll keep my vote on you. That’s fine. I do what I think is right, you do what you think is right. I think I’m being very straightforward, but obviously don’t post every single game-related thought that goes through my mind. If you’d like, here’s a bit more info about my thought process. At the beginning of the Day, you made 4 little posts in a row (292-5). Two were purely fluff, one had a brief comment about **peekercpa** ’s voting style, and the last one talked about post restrictions. I thought it was a hint about your role, and that you were posting that way due to a restriction. It wouldn’t make sense for scum to have post restrictions. So, thinking you have some special non-scum role, I figured that scum would see you as an easy target and vote for you. I was going to vote for someone who voted for you, but eventually it turned out that both people voting for you are town. This made me see your posts in a different light. I made my case against you in [post 459](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10409574&postcount=459). I waited for you to post again, to see if you’d say something to make me change my mind. Instead of making me less suspicious of you, your [next post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10410578&postcount=469) (469) gave me a scummy vibe. You cast a vote for **Nanook** - the leading vote getter, who was an easy target due to all the controversy his role claim generated. You didn’t provide much substantiation for your vote, and didn’t address any of the arguments people made against voting for **Nanook**. You did, however, explain why you weren’t participating much. Now, I no longer had a reason to think that you had some weird post restriction. That, together with everything else, gave me enough reason to vote for you. I didn’t bring up my post restriction theory before, because I didn’t want to give you any ideas. Then, when I saw that my theory was wrong, I didn’t want to say anything because I didn’t want to look dumb. When you role-claimed Admin, I didn’t believe you. However, from what I’ve read in other games on this board, I knew that the usual protocol is to accept all claims. So, I knew I’d probably have to unvote you, but I didn’t want to. The fact that a lot of people voted for you later on doesn’t detract from my point about bandwagons. When the top vote getter had 4 votes, and you already had two votes, voting for you would be too dangerous for scum, because it would needlessly put you in danger. After there was already a case against you, part of which was based on scum not voting for you, scum would be more likely to push you under the bus. You find it extremely scummy that > [@DiggitCamara](#): > > As soon as someone else asked about my powers, ok11 states “the less time you have to make stuff up, the better”. Never mind that, it hadn’t even been his/ **her** idea” Bolding mine. I don’t get your argument. I thought I was the first/only person to ask you to share info about your powers, because I didn’t want to give you an opportunity to make something up. Obviously, I didn’t invent this concept. How is that relevant at all? Even if I did use someone else’s arguments against you, why is that bad? ---
**Author:** ![JSexton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/96bed5/32.png) [@JSexton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JSexton)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/570 "2008-11-07T05:38:20Z")
Urgh. Not going well. Unban diggit, ban NaturalBlondChap. I get a newb townie read from ok11. Then again, it’s appearing that my reads this game totally suck, so who knows? ---
**Author:** ![DiggitCamara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df788c/32.png) [@DiggitCamara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DiggitCamara)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/571 "2008-11-07T05:43:22Z")
> [@ok11](#): > > That’s fine. I do what I think is right, you do what you think is right. > > I think I’m being very straightforward, but obviously don’t post every single game-related thought that goes through my mind. If you’d like, here’s a bit more info about my thought process. > > At the beginning of the Day, you made 4 little posts in a row (292-5). Two were purely fluff, one had a brief comment about **peekercpa** ’s voting style, and the last one talked about post restrictions. I thought it was a hint about your role, and that you were posting that way due to a restriction. > > It wouldn’t make sense for scum to have post restrictions. So, thinking you have some special non-scum role, I figured that scum would see you as an easy target and vote for you. I was going to vote for someone who voted for you, but eventually it turned out that both people voting for you are town. This made me see your posts in a different light. > > I made my case against you in [post 459](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10409574&postcount=459). I waited for you to post again, to see if you’d say something to make me change my mind. Instead of making me less suspicious of you, your [next post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10410578&postcount=469) (469) gave me a scummy vibe. You cast a vote for **Nanook** - the leading vote getter, who was an easy target due to all the controversy his role claim generated. You didn’t provide much substantiation for your vote, and didn’t address any of the arguments people made against voting for **Nanook**. You did, however, explain why you weren’t participating much. > > Now, I no longer had a reason to think that you had some weird post restriction. That, together with everything else, gave me enough reason to vote for you. I didn’t bring up my post restriction theory before, because I didn’t want to give you any ideas. Then, when I saw that my theory was wrong, I didn’t want to say anything because I didn’t want to look dumb. > > When you role-claimed Admin, I didn’t believe you. However, from what I’ve read in other games on this board, I knew that the usual protocol is to accept all claims. So, I knew I’d probably have to unvote you, but I didn’t want to. > > The fact that a lot of people voted for you later on doesn’t detract from my point about bandwagons. When the top vote getter had 4 votes, and you already had two votes, voting for you would be too dangerous for scum, because it would needlessly put you in danger. After there was already a case against you, part of which was based on scum not voting for you, scum would be more likely to push you under the bus. > > You find it extremely scummy that Bolding mine. > > I don’t get your argument. I thought I was the first/only person to ask you to share info about your powers, because I didn’t want to give you an opportunity to make something up. Obviously, I didn’t invent this concept. How is that relevant at all? Even if I did use someone else’s arguments against you, why is that bad? Look: you stated some reasons for your vote. I acknowledged them. I gave reasons for some. I amended others. But, then, you show a new set of “reasons” for your vote. That is called “moving the goalposts”. Not only that, but you simply skip over both the acknowledgment of the reasons for your vote, and add arguments against which there is no defense (“you didn’t believe when I claimed Admin”). Are you claiming you are the Admin? Or do you claim to know that someone else is the Admin? In that case, I’ll have to tell you: you’re lying. It looks to me like you’re simply clinging to a vote when you can’t actually justify it any more. And that looks scummy to me. ---
**Author:** ![Total\_Lost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e56c9b/32.png) [@Total\_Lost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Total_Lost)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/572 "2008-11-07T06:25:03Z")
UNVOTE DIGGIT I’m SO late for work (I’ll vote when I get there and have had a chance to re-read it all) i just hope Day doesn’t end before I get there!!! ---
**Author:** ![Total\_Lost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e56c9b/32.png) [@Total\_Lost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Total_Lost)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/573 "2008-11-07T08:08:10Z")
I think that we have a LOT of claims right now (I’m starting to get a feeling of a mass reveal J/K) I don’t want to vote DIGGIT - and especially not if he can be confirmed soon I don’t want to vote Nanook - and have already said why in a former post I don’t really want to vote NBC at the moment - his claim is a bit weak, but I don’t get that scummy vibe others seem to get (might have something do to ALs comment in T2). So for now the only one that looks like scum to me is Hero. I’m going to go with that: VOTE HERO ---
**Author:** ![peekercpa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8baadc/32.png) [@peekercpa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/peekercpa)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 10:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/574 "2008-11-07T10:22:53Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > Yes, his obscurantist style is typical for him. But that style is anti-Town. It makes it more difficult to understand him: harder to get his points, harder to converse with him, harder to find slips. Mafia is difficult enough as is; players who intentionally make it harder are not helping. > > Since I’m not seeing anyone who has a strong enough scum flavor for me to vote for them, I’m willing to remove players who are being anti-Town. And I obviously disagree. I play this game for fun and entertainment. You have a certain play style as do others and myself. Nothing I refer to can not be puzzled out if the ole grey matter is used. I certainly will not change because I just don’t agree at the most fundamental level. And, I remain unconvinced that differences in play style indicate alignment. If someone says something scummy then they should be called on it. But to vote for someone because you don’t like their “accent” seems to be a little less congruent with the approach that I take to this activity. Now you made **peek** get on the box of soap and lecture like a twittering old sop. Bad **pleo** , bad. MTC, YMMV, IMHO, Stairway to Heaven, etc. ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/575 "2008-11-07T12:07:17Z")
Hour 93 has ended, and still the sun shines on. It illuminates a brand new votecount. Nanook o/t North Shore : 5 (Boozahol Squid P.I., Hero from Sector 7G, Peekercpa, Oredigger77, NBC) NBC : 5 (Santo Rugger, Hal Briston, Pedescribe, Zeriel, JSexton) Diggit Camara : 4 (amrussell, ok11, ShadowFacts, Nanook o/t North Shore) Peekercpa : 2 (Pleonast, Fretful Porpentine) Hero from Sector 7G : 2 (One and Only Wanderers, Total Lost) Kat : 1 (Zsofia) Zeriel : 1 (Kat) ok11 : 1 (DiggitCamara)This information brought to you by **FSM** Productions. As usual, we’ll take on board any queries you may have regarding differences in the vote count. On to Hour 94. ---
**Author:** ![One\_And\_Only\_Wanderers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/838e76/32.png) [@One\_And\_Only\_Wanderers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/One_And_Only_Wanderers)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/576 "2008-11-07T12:14:00Z")
OK my take on the Nanook situation Firstly assuming he is town and telling the truth, sure he was going to have to come clean eventually, but I really don’t get his coming out on day 1 when he already had a (by definition) new vote on him. There are only 2 realistic scenarios I can imagine Pro Town He thought if he pulled this out his ass when under pressure, it wouldn’t be believable, and expected to get extra cred for revealing when under no pressure Anti town He needs people to vote for him for nefarious reasons of his own, maybe to power up some dastardly ability. I can’t really lean towards the Anti town one, as he only wanted one person to vote him per day, so if he was powered up by votes, he’s probably already there, and there has been no explosion or whatever as yet. So I tend to think he is either Town or PFK. I am not quite sure how to assess a PFK possibility as I have never been in a game with this type of role. Also, why lynch him when we can test him? If as a town we think he is scummy, we _just don’t vote for him tomorrow_ if he doesn’t die at the end of the day we know he lied and lynch him the next day. If he does die and is scum yay! If he dies but is town, at least we didn’t waste a lynch. I can see no good reason to off him today. ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/577 "2008-11-07T12:23:19Z")
Quickly unvote Diggit vote NBC - prepared to give \*\*Nanook \*\*BOD, \*\*NBC’s \*\*\*\*Jsexton \*\*challenge looks somewhat scummy. Gotta dash, sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/578 "2008-11-07T13:32:58Z")
**Peeker** , fancy taking a stab at these? > [@amrussell](#): > > I want to hear more from **peeker** on his role claim: > > 1. Why did you claim when you did? > 2. How did this help us? > 3. Are you confirmable? > 4. Why should we believe you? > > Also, **Hal** , you never answered my question ( **Santo** did - was he right?) ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/579 "2008-11-07T14:13:55Z")
**DiggitCamara** , let’s recap. I initially voted for you based on the 3 abovementioned reasons. (You attracted my attention due to my wrong post restriction hypothesis.) Yes, you addressed those 3 arguments now, but that doesn’t change my opinion: 1. your increased level of participation is nice, but the fact that you were an easy target for scum back then doesn’t change 2. having a vote on the record now, isn’t the same as having a vote back then 3. a lot of people voting for you later on, isn’t the same as people not voting for you back then. So, my initial concerns are still valid. You claimed Admin. I didn’t believe you. It wasn’t so much the actual role name, though. It’s the implication that you’re pro-town. **TubaDiva** is an Admin; enough said 🙂 Your claim was under pressure, which made it more suspect than other claims. That’s an additional reason why I’m keeping my vote on you. So what? Yes, I’ll continue to build a case against you. If I come across something that I think should be pointed out, I’ll point it out. Not because I’m clinging to a vote, or out of spite, or anything like that. People are unvoting you left and right. I think you’re more likely to be anti-town than either Nanook or NBC. If we had a viable 4th candidate, I might switch to him, and give you until tomorrow to verify your powers. However, you said > [@DiggitCamara](#): > > I think it should be confirmable by toMorrow. The words “think” and “should” mean that Tomorrow (and, if I’m right, then it will be after you’ve already strategized with your scum buddies) you can say that whatever it is you were going to do didn’t work. I might not be right about you, but at least I have logical reasons to vote for you. If you don’t see my logic, or if you think my logic is scummy, I think I’ve done all I can to make you think otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![peekercpa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8baadc/32.png) [@peekercpa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/peekercpa)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2008, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/580 "2008-11-07T14:34:57Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > **Peeker** , fancy taking a stab at these? I’ll take a shot. 1. **Hero** had kind of got his panties in a a wad. I am a prick but not so much that I want someone to feel unwelcome. Anti-town, maybe. Pro-game, absolutely. 2). See above. I’ve got a long range focus. 1. Yes 2. Well, I am town with a power so that should count for something. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198.md?page=28) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198.md?page=30)