# 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:** 48
**Author:** ![Santo\_Rugger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Santo\_Rugger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santo_Rugger)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/941 "2008-11-12T17:36:14Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > Does that mean I get coal in my stocking this year? I’m thinking C-4, ANFO, RDX, or PETN. ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/942 "2008-11-12T17:38:10Z")
**Part 1: PIS** > [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > He said it was similar to a role in Blade Runner, how did you necessarily narrow it down to THAT specific role, especially since you didn’t play in it? The fact that there was not sufficient information to narrow it down and you did implies that you have extra information that the rest of us do not. Do you really think I have extra information? How do you think I got it? Imagine you’re reading **Nanook** ’s post without knowing anything about the other game. This is the only piece of information you have upon which you can base any conclusions: > [@](#): > > In one of the offboard games, Blade Runner which no longer appears to be available, there was a role that was lynched on Day 1 I believe. He was a town aligned replicant with powers and restrictions. Someone else that played in it can explain it better than I I’m sure. I didn’t narrow anything down. That’s the only thing he told us. If he had said that in another game there was a town power role whose restriction prevented him from role claiming, I wouldn’t have reacted the way I did. I thought “replicant” was the key word, not “restriction” (because, he already told us about his restriction). > [@](#): > > The only additional point of evidence I’ve added against you was what I percieve as PIS and which you didn’t respond to when first prodded. Except, that’s not what actually happened. When **Zeriel** asked me, I answered him. You can’t blame _me_, when _you_ are the one who didn’t see my answer. I didn’t respond to you sooner, because I had something come up in real life. ---
**Author:** ![Rapier42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90db22/32.png) [@Rapier42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rapier42)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/943 "2008-11-12T17:55:08Z")
Nanook: There’s absolutely no way we can trust you at this point, sorry. Lying is pro-town only when it works. Further, your vote for yourself is fairly anti-town as well. A townie in the position you claim to be in should have gone quietly into that soft night, taken your WIFOM off the table, and let us get around to evaluating the information your banning provides. As it is, it’s likely that we’re going to spend a good portion of Tomorrow debating what to do with you, which puts Town further behind the eight ball. Pedescribe: I disagree with your plan as well. The only thing that I’m confident in regarding Nanook is that he wants votes. We should only begin voting him if we intend to ban him, and I don’t think thats the right play today. This is a great opportunity to test the existence of a Vig. Incidentally, should Nanook be around come morning, I think it would behoove us to _all_ vote him. Should he be, in fact, a bomb or some such, it’ll help spread the risk, and make sure scum come in for their fair share of it. Barring any other developments, I’ll be looking hard at anybody that doesn’t vote a still-alive Nanook Tomorrow. ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/944 "2008-11-12T17:58:31Z")
**Part 2: Masons** > [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > That’s not what I said. There’s not an advantage to a town pretending to be a mason, because scum will not claim mason unless they have good reason to believe that they aren’t there while the town does not OR the town is in or near a lylo situation. First, to what exactly does your 1st sentence refer? Second, as I’ve said before, there is an advantage. It’s only after the 3rd mason claimed that **pedescribe** and **amrussell** became almost completely confirmed. Before that, there was a possibility that they’re lying. I thought they were hinting at something, and waited to see whether I was right. At first, it looked like they might be stalling, and that if there was enough pressure on **amrussell** , he’d say I’m the 3rd mason (at which point I’d reply, “Liar, liar, pants on fire.”) > [@](#): > > My concern was that, if the chain had gotten broken, and **Oredigger** hadn’t claimed before **amrussell** was killed, you’d have been in prime position to claim mason, especially since **Pedescribe** already believed that you were one. How do you know what **Pedescribe** believed _at that time_? He might have later said something, but your assumption is that back then I knew exactly what **Pedescribe** was thinking and tailored my actions accordingly. > [@](#): > > IOW, chance of you catching scum with that is virtually nil, but there was a scum advantage to laying seeds for claiming mason. Not a smoking gun, but certainly a point where I think scum motivation is greater than town motivation. > > How is a non-mason representing as a mason NOT a gambit? If you’re pro-town, you run the risk of being caught in your deception and getting lynched. Granted, the risk you made wasn’t nearly as high as **JSexton** ’s, but it was a risk nonetheless. Again, this was not some sort of plan I put into motion myself. I made a lucky guess about CMs, which later turned out to be right. I thought **pedescribe** and **amrussell** were hinting something about me, which later turned out to be wrong. Yes, eventually I had reason to believe that others are thinking that I’m a mason. So you’re basically calling a gambit me not saying “In case you’re wondering, I’m not a mason.” ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/945 "2008-11-12T17:59:04Z")
> [@Rapier42](#): > > Incidentally, should Nanook be around come morning, I think it would behoove us to _all_ vote him. Should he be, in fact, a bomb or some such, it’ll help spread the risk, and make sure scum come in for their fair share of it. Barring any other developments, I’ll be looking hard at anybody that doesn’t vote a still-alive Nanook Tomorrow. I’m thinking you’ve got that completely backwards. See below: > [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > I must go against this advice. If he is PFK, we have no reason to believe that actually is his role restriction. Perhaps he is a SK who can only attack people who voted for him. Didn’t at least one of the dead last night have a vote on him at one point? I’m too lazy to check. Gotcha covered. I don’t know if **Nanook** got any vote/unvotes, but five people ended the day with a vote on him: **Boozahol** , **Hero from Sector 7G** , **Peekercpa** , **Oredigger77** and **NBC**. Lookie there… **Peekercpa** voted for **Nanook** and was banned. **DiggitCamera** was banned as well, without having an end-day vote on him (although I don’t know if he voted for him at an earlier time). I won’t call it damning evidence, but it’s evidence nonetheless. ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/946 "2008-11-12T18:02:42Z")
> [@Rapier42](#): > > Incidentally, should Nanook be around come morning, I think it would behoove us to _all_ vote him. Should he be, in fact, a bomb or some such, it’ll help spread the risk, and make sure scum come in for their fair share of it. Barring any other developments, I’ll be looking hard at anybody that doesn’t vote a still-alive Nanook Tomorrow. I don’t understand why both you and **pedescribe** think we should all vote for **Nanook**. Since he self-voted to save himself (which might not even work), I think he wasn’t lying about his survival condition. So wouldn’t it make more sense not to vote for him at all Tomorrow? ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/947 "2008-11-12T18:04:39Z")
NETA: If what **Hal** says turns out to be true, then there should only be one kill tonight, right? ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/948 "2008-11-12T18:09:54Z")
> [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Lookie there… **Peekercpa** voted for **Nanook** and was banned. **DiggitCamera** was banned as well, without having an end-day vote on him (although I don’t know if he voted for him at an earlier time). Revision: I went back and checked **Diggit** ’s voting record, and found that he did indeed [vote for him](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10410578&postcount=469) and then [unvote him](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10415382&postcount=560). So if the theory of “voting for **Nanook** opens you up to being banned by him” turns out to be true, then he could have been responsible for either of last night’s bannings. ---
**Author:** ![Santo\_Rugger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Santo\_Rugger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santo_Rugger)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/949 "2008-11-12T18:11:59Z")
> [@ok11](#): > > NETA: If what **Hal** says turns out to be true, then there should only be one kill tonight, right? Like he said, it’d be evidence, but it wouldn’t be confirming. It’s possible there are three killing factions, one of whom was blocked, chose not to kill, or doubled up. But for the most part, you’re right. What I think we should do is completely ignore him. Don’t vote for him at all. If he makes it through the Night, nobody votes for him Tomorrow. If he makes it through Night 3, we lynch him on Day 4. But we should really quit wasting posts on it. ---
**Author:** ![Rapier42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90db22/32.png) [@Rapier42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rapier42)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/950 "2008-11-12T18:18:08Z")
> [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > I’m thinking you’ve got that completely backwards. I’m not sure I agree. If Nanook is still alive come Morning, that’ll be decent evidence we don’t have a Vig. Voting him off is going to be our only option at that point. The only reasonable mechanic he could have that would affect _all_ players voting for him would be a plague-carrier type, and I can’t see him fulfilling that hypothetical win condition if he’s lynched. I suppose our alternative would be for the Masons to build us a random list of players to vote for Nanook, large enough to ensure a majority. I definitely don’t want to see him live through Tomorrow. ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/951 "2008-11-12T18:20:51Z")
Agreed. I like **Oredigger** ’s theory that **Nanook** is a Troll…let’s not feed him and see what happens. ---
**Author:** ![Rapier42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90db22/32.png) [@Rapier42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rapier42)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/952 "2008-11-12T18:22:57Z")
> [@ok11](#): > > I don’t understand why both you and **pedescribe** think we should all vote for **Nanook**. Since he self-voted to save himself (which might not even work), I think he wasn’t lying about his survival condition. So wouldn’t it make more sense not to vote for him at all Tomorrow? This doesn’t follow. He’s a known liar, and his self-vote could be easily be a gambit to make us think his survival condition is real, in order to guile us into testing it again Tomorrow. If he _is_ killing, thats a horrible path to take. ---
**Author:** ![Rapier42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90db22/32.png) [@Rapier42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rapier42)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/953 "2008-11-12T18:28:10Z")
> [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Agreed. I like **Oredigger** ’s theory that **Nanook** is a Troll…let’s not feed him and see what happens. I don’t agree with this. If nobody else is going to vote him, I won’t waste mine, but the sooner we’re rid of him, the better. ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/954 "2008-11-12T18:35:16Z")
> [@Rapier42](#): > > I don’t agree with this. If nobody else is going to vote him, I won’t waste mine, but the sooner we’re rid of him, the better. I’m with you on mass-lynching him tomorrow. I don’t want to see us have to continue to deal with some guy dancing around,begging for votes, and then flip flopping on whether or not we should kill him. Whether or not his role-name is ‘Troll’, that’s cpreciselyly the vibe I’m getting from his actions in this game: negative-attention seeker trying to get our goat. ---
**Author:** ![Rapier42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90db22/32.png) [@Rapier42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rapier42)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/955 "2008-11-12T18:46:18Z")
A thought: Nanook may have waited until after he was voted to claim his condition expressly to prevent us from testing him Day One. ---
**Author:** ![Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/d9b06d/32.png) [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boozahol_Squid_P.I)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/956 "2008-11-12T19:37:21Z")
> [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > I’m with you on mass-lynching him tomorrow. I don’t want to see us have to continue to deal with some guy dancing around,begging for votes, and then flip flopping on whether or not we should kill him. On further reflection, I’m actually not entirely sure about this. We also have to look out for the possibility of some sort of Jester role, too. I’d feel much better if we had a Vig to do the dirty work. ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/957 "2008-11-12T19:39:48Z")
> [@Pedescribe](#): > > My screen name is Domencio Scandella. > > (who is that based on?) It’s [based on](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Domenico-Scandella-Known-Menocchio-Inquisition/dp/0866981489) **Menocchio** , who is a Charter Member. ---
**Author:** ![Rapier42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/90db22/32.png) [@Rapier42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rapier42)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/958 "2008-11-12T20:05:27Z")
> [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > On further reflection, I’m actually not entirely sure about this. We also have to look out for the possibility of some sort of Jester role, too. I’d feel much better if we had a Vig to do the dirty work. In a best case scenario, Nanook doesn’t survive the Night. If he does, though, we’re left with three options: 1. Mass vote 2. Majority vote, preferably handled by the Masons 3. No votes I don’t like option 3 at all. Every Day he’s alive at this point is another Day taken up with discussion of him, not to mention we run the risk of further nasty Night actions from him. Of the other two, consider: If he’s got a win condition based on number of votes for him, or a power that can affect everyone that votes for him, good game design would suggest that we’ve got a way of counteracting that, ie a Vig. If he’s alive in the morning, thats a decent indication that we’ve got no Vig, ergo, he can’t bomb everyone that votes for him, and a hypothetical Jester win condition shouldn’t affect the rest of us. So we can go either way, really. A Mason-dictated majority vote might be the best, just on the off chance that he _could_ affect everybody that votes for him. ---
**Author:** ![Santo\_Rugger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Santo\_Rugger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santo_Rugger)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/959 "2008-11-12T20:11:02Z")
> [@Rapier42](#): > > 1. Majority vote, preferably handled by the Masons… A Mason-dictated majority vote might be the best, just on the off chance that he _could_ affect everybody that votes for him. I don’t understand the logic behind this proposed idea. Elaborate? ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2008, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/960 "2008-11-12T20:19:33Z")
> [@Rapier42](#): > > 1. No votes > > I don’t like option 3 at all. Every Day he’s alive at this point is another Day taken up with discussion of him, not to mention we run the risk of further nasty Night actions from him. I see what you’re saying, but personally I’d like to go with option 3 **if** there is no 2nd kill toNight. Then there’s less harm in keeping **Nanook** around an extra Day. And if we agree on that toDay, then we won’t even mention him Tomorrow. That would address both of your concerns. If there’s a second kill, then I’m not sure which approach is best. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198.md?page=47) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198.md?page=49)