# 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:** 55
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2008, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1081 "2008-11-16T02:57:25Z")
> [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > This isn’t the first time you’ve characterized Zeriel’s vote as ‘putting momentum on the Hal train’, only for it to be suddenly derailed by Pleonast’s vote for JSexton. While I know you’ve had a hard-on for a Hal lynch all game long (where’s MHaye’s speech about not dragging old grudges into new games when you need it?), it seems like you’re tinting this far too much with your anti-Hal lenses. First, I believe **Hal** and I were scumbuddies the last time we played together, and I have no grudge against him whatsoever. Second, the reason it’s not the first time I’ve said that about **Zeriel’s** vote is because I just copied my previous vote analysis and expanded it to include **Zeriel**. > [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > Pleo’s vote did just as much to take the heat off of Zeriel as it did anything for Hal. I agree and should have mentioned that, but again I was quoting my previous language. > [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > None of this is enough for me to slap a vote on anyone today, yet, though. Fine with me - aside from placing my own vote, I have not explicitly advocated for anyone to follow my lead. I’m laying out the facts as I see them and asking people to analyze. My own analysis so far makes me suspicious of **Hal** , but I’m not 100% sure he’s scum, just as I wasn’t 100% sure **JSexton** was Town yesterDay. What I think would be foolish is to ignore the data we have from yesterDay, so I’m going to try to push everyone to look at it and discuss it. (The discussion so far has been very interesting, IMO). Do you get any kind of read from the sequence? ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2008, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1082 "2008-11-16T03:08:39Z")
> [@ShadowFacts](#): > > My argument yesterDay, and so far toDay, is that the person that was being protected was **Hal Briston**. Please take a look at what I’ve posted on that and let me know what you think. I vaguely remember reading that Yesterday and I’d like to read it again. Can you provide a link or at least a general idea of where it is? ---
**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 16, 2008, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1083 "2008-11-16T03:28:57Z")
[quote=“ShadowFacts, post:1081, topic:470198”] First, I believe **Hal** and I were scumbuddies the last time we played together, and I have no grudge against him whatsoever. Second, the reason it’s not the first time I’ve said that about **Zeriel’s** vote is because I just copied my previous vote analysis and expanded it to include **Zeriel**. [quote] Sorry, for whatever reason, I thought I’d remembered the two of you locking horns in some game before. > [@](#): > > (The discussion so far has been very interesting, IMO). Do you get any kind of read from the sequence? I think those votes have a lote of information locked up in them, but unfortunately, at this point, we don’t have enough information to unlock them. If Zeriel turns out to be scum, I think that there’s good reason to look over Pleo’s drive by vote with some suspicion, and vice versa. I don’t see enough right now, though. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2008, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1084 "2008-11-16T03:31:27Z")
Okay, I’m looking at these votes you’ve posted, I’m really not seeing **Hal** in any real danger here until **Zeriel** votes for **Hal**. The closest **Hal** got to being lynched Yesterday was within 2 votes, and that’s only after **Zeriel** who was tied with him after voting for him, voted for him, which means even she was one vote ahead. Bottom line, I’m not sure it was necessarily Hal that was being protected, but it certainly does look like either **Zeriel** or **Hal** is scum based on the vote patterns. What I want to do is generalize a little bit here, **Shadow** , let’s say there’s a reasonably high chance that there is at least one scum between **Zeriel** and **Hal**. If that’s true, whose votes are suspicious? The two you mentioned, **Pleo** and **ok11** are the two that stick out. So, why don’t we go back and look at those two votes, as well as put **Hal** and **Zeriel** both under the microscope and see what comes up? Also, I want to make a couple comments on your comments… > [@ShadowFacts](#): > > 768: Official vote count > JSexton = 4 (Squid, Zsofia, Santo, Rapier42) > Zeriel = 2 (Kat, amrussell) > Hal = 1 (OreDigger) > > 769 & 771: **Pedescribe** then votes for **JSexton** , taking him to 5, but then unvotes after **JSexton** explains himself. So we’re back to the count above. > > 778: I post my review and vote for Hal, making it… > JSexton = 4 (Squid, Zsofia, Santo, Rapier42) > Zeriel = 2 (Kat, amrussell) > Hal = 2 (OreDigger, Shadow) > > 788: amrussell chimes in with a solid post on why he thinks JSexton is probably town. To my read, the steam is beginning to come off of the JSexton train a bit (although Zeriel is still pressing him). Interesting the **Zeriel** is the next person in the most trouble, and she is pushing the top vote-getter, but never actually votes for him. > [@](#): > > 797: Hero votes for Zeriel, making it… > JSexton = 4 (Squid, Zsofia, Santo, Rapier42) > Zeriel = 3 (Kat, amrussell, Hero) > Hal = 2 (OreDigger, Shadow) > > 805: Then Hal himself votes for JSexton, making it… > JSexton = 5 (Squid, Zsofia, Santo, Rapier42, Hal) > Zeriel = 3 (Kat, amrussell, Hero) > Hal = 2 (OreDigger, Shadow) > > 806: But Santo then unvotes JSexton right after, making it… > JSexton = 4 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal) > Zeriel = 3 (Kat, amrussell, Hero) > Hal = 2 (OreDigger, Shadow) > > 809: Zeriel then votes for Hal, making it 4-3-3 with some momentum on the Hal train: > JSexton = 4 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal) > Zeriel = 3 (Kat, amrussell, Hero) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) I think this vote is very interesting, and we should probably go back and reread why she was pressuring **JSexton** but then ultimately voted for **Hal**. Also, I have to disagree that the **Hal** train has momentum here, this is the last vote he gets. > [@](#): > > 813: Then Pleonast votes for JSexton, taking Hal out of immediate danger. > JSexton = 5 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal, Pleonast) > Zeriel = 3 (Kat, amrussell, Hero) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) This, of course, is the suspicious vote. But if **Pleo** is scum and he’s voting to protect, is he protecting **Zeriel** or **Hal**? > [@](#): > > 825: pedescribe piles on…[we now know this is a town vote] > JSexton = 6 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal, Pleonast, pede) > Zeriel = 3 (Kat, amrussell, Hero) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) > > 833: Jsexton votes Zeriel…[we now know this is a town vote] > JSexton = 6 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal, Pleonast, pede) > Zeriel = 4 (Kat, amrussell, Hero, JSexton) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) > > 863: pedescribe makes things interesting by swapping… > JSexton = 5 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal, Pleonast) > Zeriel = 5 (Kat, amrussell, Hero, JSexton, pede) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) > > 874: Nanook (PFK) puts JSexton back in the lead… > JSexton = 6 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal, Pleonast, Nanook) > Zeriel = 5 (Kat, amrussell, Hero, JSexton, pede) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) Come to think of it, this may have some significance, or it may not. We really have no idea what **Nanook** ’s powers were or what his goal was. Maybe **Zeriel** is his PFK partner and he was trying to save her? I can’t imagine this was saving \*\*Hal[/B]at all since he was already seemingly saved. > [@](#): > > 893: Blaster ties it up again… > JSexton = 6 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal, Pleonast, Nanook) > Zeriel = 6 (Kat, amrussell, Hero, JSexton, pede, Blaster) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) > > 907: ok11 breaks the tie with no reason, stating he will explain later… > JSexton = 7 (Squid, Zsofia, Rapier42, Hal, Pleonast, Nanook, ok11) > Zeriel = 6 (Kat, amrussell, Hero, JSexton, pede, Blaster) > Hal = 3 (OreDigger, Shadow, Zeriel) Did we ever get an explanation later? Also, this vote really only looks suspicious if **Zeriel** is scum, it really doesn’t look bad if **Hal** is because he’s long since saved. ---
**Author:** ![Fretful\_Porpentine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fretful_porpentine/32/2873_2.png) [@Fretful\_Porpentine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fretful_Porpentine)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2008, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1085 "2008-11-16T03:48:50Z")
> [@](#): > > Did we ever get an explanation later? We got one earlier, actually, in [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10434598&postcount=864). **ok11** made several follow-up posts after the vote, but none of them seem to state the case against **JSexton** as coherently as she does in the one I linked. ---
**Author:** ![ok11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8baadc/32.png) [@ok11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ok11)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2008, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1086 "2008-11-16T04:00:35Z")
I realize it’s unclear from the post, but when I said that an explanation will follow shortly, I was referring to an explanation of why my first vote was unofficial. I saw that several people had a problem with what I did, so I wanted to let them know there’s a reason for it (that explanation is in [post 914](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10436890&postcount=914)). As **Fretful Porpentine** said, I’ve already laid out my reasons for voting to ban **Jsexton** in post 864, and didn’t have anything to add afterwards. ---
**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 16, 2008, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1087 "2008-11-16T05:19:40Z")
All right. I know that this is probably a very weak reason to place a vote, and I may get excorciated for putting it down. But honestly, I don’t really buy the case made against Hal. I don’t even buy the case made against Zeriel by Kat and others for essentially being a little evasive, as being somewhat evasive is just part of the mindset made in this game (q.v., my weaselly little sentence opening this post). But right now we have what I feel is a goldmine of information from the vote trail yesterday, and not a lot of ways to reliably ‘crack’ into it. Reliable discovery of Zeriel’s alignment would go a long ways in doing that, and I just don’t know where to go other than that. Ban: Zeriel ---
**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 16, 2008, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1088 "2008-11-16T05:28:43Z")
So, just in case **Zeriel** comes wandering in here and wants to know how the hell she should respond to that vote (it’s a vote for a lynch for information, and I know that I’d hate it if I was in her spot), I’m still open to changing my vote based on a reasonable case made against someone else. So far in this game, major contenders for lynching that are still alive are **Zeriel, Hal Briston, and HeroFromSector7G**. Maybe you could count me in the running, after I racked up 3 votes over the whole interpretation-of- **Santo** ’s-role thing. None of these cases have been hugely compelling, and all seem to be of the same sort of Day One, ‘scare up a case against someone because you’ve got to’ variety. Do you have something stronger than that, **Zeriel**? ---
**Author:** ![Hero\_From\_Sector\_7G](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/65b543/32.png) [@Hero\_From\_Sector\_7G](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hero_From_Sector_7G)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2008, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1089 "2008-11-16T06:09:20Z")
> [@ShadowFacts](#): > > That’s the end of relevant voting (actually, ALL voting if my review was correct). So, **Hero** , now that the sequence includes **Zeriel** , what conclusions can you glean? The exact same conclusion I just posted. **Hal** was never in any true danger, and it doesn’t make sense that scum would fall over themselves to protect him. By YOUR own logic **Zeriel** was in more danger, and I find it really curious that you completely neglected to mention that until I pressed you. I agree that the **JSexton** wagon took a lot of extra weight. I noticed that **Hal** and **ZSofia** hopped on awkwardly and with little reason. > [@ShadowFacts](#): > > Please answer my original question: you said I wasn’t vocal about not liking the **Jsexton** bandwagon, I replied by asking if you had seen my posts from yesterday (which I had already re-posted and which were vocal about not liking the **JSexton** bandwagon). You say you’ve seen them, so the question remains: What else would you have liked me to do? Yesterday you never made it vocally clear that you were _opposed_ to a **JSexton** lynch. You just attacked **Hal**. I’m getting an uneasy feeling from you because you are equating yesterday’s attack on **Hal** as a pro-town defense of **JSexton**. This combined with your complete lack of mentioning **Zeriel** feels like a mis-representation of what was really happening yesterday. Also, you did a lot of work putting together that list of votes. In doing so did you draw any new conclusions? ---
**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 16, 2008, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1090 "2008-11-16T08:10:36Z")
Just letting you guys know I probably won’t be on much tomorrow, either. I’ll catch up on Monday, most likely. P.S. Threesums are fun. ---
**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 16, 2008, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1091 "2008-11-16T09:53:34Z")
> [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > Just letting you guys know I probably won’t be on much tomorrow, either. I’ll catch up on Monday, most likely. > > P.S. Threesums are fun. Do recall that if we have a short day, we could be finished up by Monday. 48 hours is at 3AM EST, Monday. ---
**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 16, 2008, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1092 "2008-11-16T10:01:50Z")
> [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > Do recall that if we have a short day, we could be finished up by Monday. 48 hours is at 3AM EST, Monday. No, it won’t. Day will not end before 3PM EST on Monday. Consider this semi-confirmation of my role. ---
**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 16, 2008, 10:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1093 "2008-11-16T10:12:27Z")
> [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > So far in this game, major contenders for lynching that are still alive are **Zeriel, Hal Briston, and HeroFromSector7G**. Maybe you could count me in the running, after I racked up 3 votes over the whole interpretation-of- **Santo** ’s-role thing… You’re still doing it. > [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > Didn’t Santo’s earlier role claim require him to lynch scum in order to extend the da? While I’m less convinced of this mechanism’s pro-townieness (not in design, just in function, where we essentially have 48 hour days followed by a dusk with discussion and minor vote-wrangling), I can’t see how a player would give up the opportunity to be able to utilize such a role by not voting. > THere’s either got to be more to Santo’s roleclaim, or he’s lying about something. I never said that. Ever. I will remove my vote if you prove me wrong. You are twisting what I’ve said (or rather, what I haven’t said), badly. **Vote Boozaholic** ---
**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 16, 2008, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1094 "2008-11-16T10:18:52Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > … in the light of which, it’s interesting to me to note that following **OK11** ’s post [907](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10436816&postcount=907) (ignoring **Nanook** ’s vote/unvote, effectively the last vote yesterDay) **Santo Rugger** posted 14 times but somehow failed to have a vote in at the end of they day. > > Those posts were either back-and-forth with \*\*OAOW \*\*over whether town could have wholly negative roles, fluff with \*\*Blam \*\*or discussion about how to deal with \*\*Nanook \*\*toMorrow. Given that he’d said [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10438009&postcount=949): > > I need to ask: Why no vote? I believe these are two separate thoughts. Hal already answered the second question (with names switched, of course). As for the first, I felt quite strongly about the \*\*JSexton \*\* lynch. My gut was screaming “scum scum scum!” But then **Shadow Facts** reminded me of the mindset I had when I was trying to do something a bit out of the box and was garnering suspicion for it. He made me realize that **JSexton** could have, in fact (and did) have a pro town motivation. When I removed my vote, I was a bit disheartened that I got so excited and was so sure that **JSexton** was scum, that when I thought about his _motivation_ I was a bit disappointed that I got that worked up about it. I developed tunnel vision, and didn’t have the peripheral vision to lay down a solid vote at that point in time. ---
**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 16, 2008, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1095 "2008-11-16T10:21:52Z")
> [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > You’re still doing it. > > I never said that. Ever. I will remove my vote if you prove me wrong. You are twisting what I’ve said (or rather, what I haven’t said), badly. > > **Vote Boozaholic** No, you’re right. I got my (obviously wrong) guess of what your power was from Day One fixed in my head as you saying that was it. _Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa._ ---
**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 16, 2008, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1096 "2008-11-16T10:30:46Z")
> [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > Let’s make things interesting in here, why don’t we? > > I’m Terry, the board’s doctor. > > I kind of think that’s a misspelling (the doctor part, not the Terry part), because my powers seem to align more with what Jerry, the board directors powers would be, and have nothing at all to do with what a Mafia Doctor would do. > > My powers are not confirmable in any way I can see at this time. However, with more information, that might change. My powers have to do with being able to extend the length of the Day. However, there has to be a very precise game mechanism that happens in order for me to be able to extend a given Day. The old deadline and extension will not be announced publicly, hence the reason my powers aren’t really confirmable. The only way I can think they would be is is somebody else knows when the day was _supposed_ to end, and the Day didn’t end at that time. > > I’m announcing now to give us a data point to start working off of, and because my power isn’t really powerful enough to effect the game directly (i.e. not investigative, protective, etc.), so it seems me giving a data point will be more useful than holding this info back. > [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > I’m sorry, but I have to say I don’t see the logic here in this move. **I would make a suggestion that you try to keep that which you left ambiguous unconfirmed**. The precise value of killing you cannot be calculated without knowing whether or not you know the current deadline, what conditions are required to allow you to extend it, and by how much you can extend it. > > However, I am willing to say that, as boneheaded as I think this is, that I also think that it’s unlikely to be scum motivated. > [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > Concerning whether or not I knew the current deadline: If I did, I would tell everybody, and there wouldn’t be much of a point in **Og** not telling us. > > **Concerning the conditions required to allow me to extend it and how long I can extend it: I already took your advice before I read your post. 😉** > > And, being called a bonehead from **BlaM** , oddly, seems like a compliment. I’ll take it! > [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > I’m sorry, but I have to say I don’t see the logic here in this move. I would make a suggestion that you try to keep that which you left ambiguous unconfirmed. The precise value of killing you cannot be calculated without knowing whether or not you know the current deadline, what conditions are required to allow you to extend it, and by how much you can extend it. > > However, I am willing to say that, as boneheaded as I think this is, that I also think that it’s unlikely to be scum motivated. > [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > Let’s make things interesting in here, why don’t we? > > I’m Terry, the board’s doctor. > > I kind of think that’s a misspelling (the doctor part, not the Terry part), because my powers seem to align more with what Jerry, the board directors powers would be, and have nothing at all to do with what a Mafia Doctor would do. > > My powers are not confirmable in any way I can see at this time. However, with more information, that might change. My powers have to do with being able to extend the length of the Day. However, there has to be a very precise game mechanism that happens in order for me to be able to extend a given Day. The old deadline and extension will not be announced publicly, hence the reason my powers aren’t really confirmable. The only way I can think they would be is is somebody else knows when the day was _supposed_ to end, and the Day didn’t end at that time. > > I’m announcing now to give us a data point to start working off of, and because my power isn’t really powerful enough to effect the game directly (i.e. not investigative, protective, etc.), so it seems me giving a data point will be more useful than holding this info back. > [@Boozahol\_Squid\_P.I](#): > > 20%? Well,\*\* I have a guess\*\* about what you’re referring to. Kind of a ‘win-more’ bonus power? > > In any event, if your role really is Board Doctor, then we’re a little disadvantaged by the fact that our doc isn’t a protective role, but a discussion prolonger. I don’t really see the advantage you’ve given us by role revealing this early, even if your power is of mediocre utility. > > I think it’s unlikely you’re lying about your rolename, but even if everything is as you say it is, what possible benefit do you think you’ve given the town by coming out now? And you _can_ see the bennies for scum by allowing **a half-assed role reveal** , allowing the ‘true’ power role pool to shrink, yes? Bolding mine. \*\* Boozy\*\* has directly stated that he thought my role claim was half assed. Either he’s forgetting what he’s typing, or he’s making shit up as he goes along, assigning people’s (i.e. my) claims his own attributes and trying to convince the rest of the town of said attributes. Okay, I’m really going to bed now. ---
**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 16, 2008, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1097 "2008-11-16T10:41:19Z")
> [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > Bolding mine. \*\* Boozy\*\* has directly stated that he thought my role claim was half assed. Either he’s forgetting what he’s typing, or he’s making shit up as he goes along, assigning people’s (i.e. my) claims his own attributes and trying to convince the rest of the town of said attributes. > > Okay, I’m really going to bed now. Well, I do think a roleclaim that’s 'essentially ‘part of my role allows me to extend the day’ is a half-assed roleclaim. I’m not trying to smudge you, and I’m not saying you’re wrong for doing it. But it’s not a full roleclaim. As for assigning you attributes that I’d made up, I grant you that. It wasn’t intentional, it’s just the result of my hooch-ridden footbrain getting muddled over the course of the game. ---
**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 16, 2008, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1098 "2008-11-16T11:36:39Z")
Well, I’m still suspicious of **Zeriel** , but here’s something else to be going on with. Following up on the vote-pattern analysis that has people looking at Hal and Pleo, as well as my question to Santo at the top of the page, here’s a faint pattern I think I’ve picked up. Way back on Day One, I asked Hal a question when he seemed to have some information about the alignment of roles. Here’s the first answer I got: > [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > **Hal** was saying that unless somebody admits to being a certain role at that point in time, we won’t know they’re that certain role yet. The example he used was of a sock [puppet], an account created as a puppet of another poster, or multiple accounts created by a single person. Based on my role and that of the Charter Members, I’m guessing that the Sock(s), if they exist, are going to be bad guys. Hal seems to agree. Same with Troll(s), IMHO. Ok, maybe I’m dumb and it was perfectly obvious to everyone what Hal meant, but I thought it was odd that Santo answered for him. ToDay, I ask Santo a question and… > [@Hal\_Briston](#): > > Not to speak for **Rugger** , but… > > **JSexton** claimed he needed a vote on him. He later voted for himself, claiming he could do that one time. If that were truely the case, then if no one voted for him today, he would die. **Rugger** was promoting puting this claim to the test. If **JSexton** were still alive after that, we’d know he was lying, and he’d be lynched. Aside from the glaring error in this, I don’t understand why Hal is rushing to defend Santo. Here’s something else, from Pleo: > [@Pleonast](#): > > I’ve reread the whole **JSexton** Gambit. Here’s my opinion on the people involved: > > **Zsofia** , **Squid** , **Hal** : they seem to have Townie reactions–wondering what **JS** is accusing, accepting an either-or situation, then negative reaction at the sudden withdrawal of the accusation. > **Oredigger** , **ok** : fairly Townie bewilderment. > **JSexton** : tries one player, when that quickly fails, switches to another. Primary defense is “it’s obvious I’d get heat, so no scum would do that”. Yeah, right. Scum around here are more clever than that. Not a good excuse. This post ([813](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10433343&postcount=813)) looks like a fairly detailed review. But someone’s missing: > [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > **Vote JSexton** > > I don’t give a shit about links, your “gambit” had just as much of a chance of exposing a scum as it did of exposing a power role. And you being satisfied because he said, “Huh? I don’t know what you’re talking about!” is kinda weak. > [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > I’m still kind of irked of the way **JSexton** is saying, “look at all these games where I was town and I did this”. Almost as if he had them in his pocket so he could pull them out when **ok11** didn’t confess because he knew he was town in the first place? > [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > I can’t see your sig line, but when I said you had them in your pocket, I didn’t mean you had researched them specifically to be able to recall them. I meant that you had them in your back pocket, in your toolbox, in your bag of tricks. Things that you’d done before as town that worked that you can now do as scum and say, “Hey, look, I did this as _Town_!” > > I’m pretty sure you knew that’s what I meant, though. > [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > And now you’re using the “scum would never do that” defense. I’m not impressed. That last post is number [782](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10431478&postcount=782). I would say Santo was pretty heavily involved in the gambit. Certainly he was a big part of the conversation and put a vote down. But he’s written out of Pleo’s summary. Again, it could just be a mistake, but it looks like he’s directing our attention away from one player and on to others. So for what it’s worth, there seems to be some interaction between Hal, Santo and Pleo. ---
**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 16, 2008, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1099 "2008-11-16T11:38:55Z")
> [@Santo\_Rugger](#): > > No, it won’t. Day will not end before 3PM EST on Monday. > > Consider this semi-confirmation of my role. No. Days are max 144 hours, min 48. Betting that it lasts an extra 12 hours over the minimum gives you a 7/8 chance of being right. Whoop-de-do. ---
**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 16, 2008, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198/1100 "2008-11-16T15:41:23Z")
> [@ok11](#): > > I thought that **Santo Rugger** never confirmed or denied your win-more bonus idea. But otherwise, I agree that it’s interesting that he didn’t vote. > > I’d also like to know why **One And Only Wanderers** kept his vote on me after I’ve already explained the unofficial vote thing. Was it because you didn’t believe my explanation, or did you have some other reason? no just that. I don’t like people not voting for the one they find scummiest. So he could have gotten too far ahead yousaid? So what, if you think he is scum why worry about that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198.md?page=54) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-mafia/470198.md?page=56)