# Werewolf (Mafia)--The Split \[Signups--In progress\] **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [February 13, 2009, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692 "2009-02-13T15:44:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 49
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/961 "2009-03-05T20:19:16Z")
> [@Seeker\_of\_Truth\_and\_Beauty](#): > > I forgot to check on this yesterday; below is my Role PM quoted (although I got it in email; apparently I didn’t have my PMs turned on.) > > It’s far too late to save my soul, but there you go. Here’s the deal. If you’re a townie there is no reason to claim “bad guy”, period unless one of the following two conditions are true: 1. you’re a mason or some other provably town citizen 2. the bad guy faction you’re messing with has a member they do not know about, or has some other reason to react poorly to a scum claim by someone they know isn’t scum. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/962 "2009-03-05T20:43:45Z")
I believe that **rexnervous** was referring to the spelling of toMarrow, not the capitalization. Also, we have a disagreement over **Telcontar’s** style, for lack of a better word. Part of being aggressive, I think, would be to take statements and questions head on. When people disagree with **Telcontar** , for the most part, it seems to me that he says “You’re wrong, whatever,” and moves on. He’s misrepresenting, as **rexnervous** says, what’s being said around and about him, which is a particular kind of passive-aggression that doesn’t speak well to his motivation, I don’t think. It’s politics. Is it bad form to talk about my reasons for initially voting for **Telcontar** even though I still think **Seeker** is the most likely wolf? I think it’s important to have the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/963 "2009-03-05T20:46:29Z")
Just to flesh that point out a bit more: what I mean is that **Telcontar’s** combination of in-your-face posting with obliqueness is suspicious to me. Disguising a brush-off with an air of arrogance seems like a good way to evade. ---
**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:** [March 5, 2009, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/964 "2009-03-05T21:51:51Z")
Hey guys, I have something I forgot about 4:00 Friday EST, so the day will end, again, Noon Friday EST. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/965 "2009-03-05T22:02:03Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Just to flesh that point out a bit more: what I mean is that **Telcontar’s** combination of in-your-face posting with obliqueness is suspicious to me. Disguising a brush-off with an air of arrogance seems like a good way to evade. See, Telcontar pings my radar as well, and I voted for him once already(I changed it later). Anyway, do you have any examples of him brushing-off anyone? Everytime I think I’m going to vote to test/lynch him, I have a hard time describing what it is that makes me think he’s a wolf or finding examples. ---
**Author:** ![Oredigger77](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/oredigger77/32/3181_2.png) [@Oredigger77](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oredigger77)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/966 "2009-03-05T22:09:32Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > I believe that **rexnervous** was referring to the spelling of toMarrow, not the capitalization. The spelling is me not knowing how to spell. I type it up in word but with their weird capitalization the spell checker freaks out so that one keeps being missed. In short I’m an idiot. ---
**Author:** ![Telcontar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Telcontar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telcontar)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2009, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/967 "2009-03-05T23:24:38Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > I believe that **rexnervous** was referring to the spelling of toMarrow, not the capitalization. > > Also, we have a disagreement over **Telcontar’s** style, for lack of a better word. Part of being aggressive, I think, would be to take statements and questions head on. When people disagree with **Telcontar** , for the most part, it seems to me that he says “You’re wrong, whatever,” and moves on. He’s misrepresenting, as **rexnervous** says, what’s being said around and about him, which is a particular kind of passive-aggression that doesn’t speak well to his motivation, I don’t think. It’s politics. I don’t have much patience for fools, that is true. I was/am really annoyed about the no-lynch argument; it was silly and people were making arguments that were simply false empirically. I expected better. I also expected some of the veteran players to chime in and point out that i was right; as people are finally acknowledging today, not lynching is going to be in the town’s interest one of these days. Not saying anything while I almost get lynched for bad reasons is anti town (paging **Zeriel** ). I only started telling people to f off once it was clear that logic wasn’t persuading anyone. Other than that, I don’t think I’ve been any more forceful in my play than anyone else. I’ve certainly answered every time someone has asked me to explain a vote or a suspicion (502 for example [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10863879&postcount=502](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10863879&postcount=502) ). If someone has a case against me, let them state it. Simply saying you don’t like my attitude is fairly insubstantial, especially since my attitude was provoked. I don’t have any suspicions that can be productively discussed until we’ve resolved **seeker**. ---
**Author:** ![AllWalker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@AllWalker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AllWalker)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/968 "2009-03-06T00:00:04Z")
**Telcontar** , the maths is not the issue. I now see what you were getting at, game-theory-wise (even if I didn’t straight away), but I grew concerned over your _insistance_ that we skip the lynch Day 1. So you are right, we can afford not to lynch on a certain Day, but the first lynch is always going to be random. Stalling at the start helps us none - stalling later might help us more. I don’t like the way this game is going. If **Seeker** turns up innocent, then the numbers start looking really bad. The wolves have so far been some combination of clever and lucky, and it’s starting to get under my skin. We have to hit this time, we really do. If we miss, we need to start rethinking our strategies. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/969 "2009-03-06T00:24:48Z")
> [@AllWalker](#): > > I don’t like the way this game is going. If **Seeker** turns up innocent, then the numbers start looking really bad. The wolves have so far been some combination of clever and lucky, and it’s starting to get under my skin. > > We have to hit this time, we really do. If we miss, we need to start rethinking our strategies. I know, and I have doubts about Seeker being a wolf. I mean, what wolf would be so dumb? Like I said a few posts ago, Seeker is either a dumb wolf or a dumb townie(uh…no offense, Seeker). I am starting to think he’s a dumb townie. However, the lynch has been moved to 12 noon tomorrow and I don’t have an adequate suggestion for another lynchee. By adequate suggestion, I mean a suggestion that has enough evidence to turn over all the votes(except for that one). Of course, if Seeker is a wolf and we don’t kill him, we’re going to look like idiots. it will be known as the game where “a scum revealed itself and still lived” The question(s) become these: **If Seeker is a townie, what are our future scenarios? How badly hurt are we? Do we have anything better than a guess for an alternative lynch?** ---
**Author:** ![MHaye](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bbe5ce/32.png) [@MHaye](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MHaye)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/970 "2009-03-06T00:32:10Z")
> [@Telcontar](#): > > I was/am really annoyed about the no-lynch argument; it was silly and people were making arguments that were simply false empirically. I expected better. I also expected some of the veteran players to chime in and point out that i was right; as people are finally acknowledging today, not lynching is going to be in the town’s interest one of these days. You will not find a single veteran player of these games around here who will agree that the right play on Day 1 is no lynch except in very unusual circumstances. The only time to consider No Lynch is when the lack of a kill nets you an extra Day’s discussion and there is no real prospect of the Werewolves suffering a failure of a kill for other reasons. The issue is not the numbers that you presented (which I haven’t reviewed carefully), it is the loss of the information you derive from the Day 1 lynch later in the game. By forcing a lynch, you make people take up positions that can be examined later for unsupported shifts away. While I’ve escaped from Munchkinland briefly, let’s place a vote. **Vote Seeker of Truth and Beauty**. I will be very very disappointed if Seeker turns out to be a rancher. ---
**Author:** ![DaphneBlack](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/daphneblack/32/5389_2.png) [@DaphneBlack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaphneBlack)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/971 "2009-03-06T00:41:19Z")
If we kill Seeker and he’s a townie, we’ll be at 9-4 (8-4 after the nightkill). One more mislynch would put us at 6-4 and Lynch or Lose. I don’t know if we have anything better than a guess, but I would really strongly consider looking at those who have up to now received _no_ scrutiny at all (I listed who I thought that was on my list). I also think MHaye’s potential ‘slip’ is possibly something, but that’s the only thing he’s said (or that Lemur said) which pinged me. ---
**Author:** ![DaphneBlack](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/daphneblack/32/5389_2.png) [@DaphneBlack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaphneBlack)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/972 "2009-03-06T00:43:53Z")
MHaye, you do know Seeker claimed Farmer, right? Why do you say you’ll be disappointed if he turns up rancher? ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/973 "2009-03-06T00:47:57Z")
> [@Mahaloth](#): > > See, Telcontar pings my radar as well, and I voted for him once already(I changed it later). Anyway, do you have any examples of him brushing-off anyone? > > Everytime I think I’m going to vote to test/lynch him, I have a hard time describing what it is that makes me think he’s a wolf or finding examples. In response to this and **Telcontar’s** response, what follows is a pretty thorough recap of what **Telcontar** has said so far and the context in which it was said. I want to preface it by saying that it wasn’t put together with an agenda, so it includes some things that point one direction, some that point in another, and a lot that arguably don’t point at all. It is my honest effort to catalog what’s happened thus far, which I think I’m obligated to do because, especially on reread, I see that I’ve pretty much been questioning him from the start. ---
**Author:** ![AllWalker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/db5fbb/32.png) [@AllWalker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AllWalker)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/974 "2009-03-06T01:11:23Z")
> [@DaphneBlack](#): > > I don’t know if we have anything better than a guess, but I would really strongly consider looking at those who have up to now received _no_ scrutiny at all (I listed who I thought that was on my list). I also think MHaye’s potential ‘slip’ is possibly something, but that’s the only thing he’s said (or that Lemur said) which pinged me. Here’s a thought I am just throwing out there - perhaps we should look at people who attract little suspicion, but who also post a lot. These people are being vocal yet somehow avoiding attention, and so it might be worth looking into. Here’s what I have: **Mahaloth** - 2nd in post count (excluding **pedescribe** ) but not accused of much **rexnervous** - 4th in post count, not accused of much **Oredigger** - 7th in post count, not accused of much **Jimmy** and **AllWalker** - tied 8th, not accused of much After that we have **[Undecided] Adrian** and **JC** , respectively, who have not been accused of much. People who attract suspicion might post a lot in the first place, and then have to post more in order to argue their case. But there seems to be a lot of moderate to heavy posters who are flying under everyone’s radars. Perhaps this needs addressing? ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/975 "2009-03-06T01:21:29Z")
First meaningful post is an accusation against **Daphne** , to which she responds: [QUOTE=Daphne] Originally Posted by Telcontar > [@](#): > > Re: who to test. > Daphe seems to be responding very strongly to any suggestion that she might be suspicious and acting rather…high strung about all of this (note the fairly random attack on Seeker and the very high post count). I think that makes her the best target for today given that november is being replaced. > I’m not ‘very strongly to any suggestion that she might be suspicious’, I am answering people’s vague attacks. It is not pro-town to just sit around and let people attack you for no good reason. I’m the only person who’s being attacked, really, and the reasons are _bad_. My attack on Seeker is _not_ random – I was very specific about what I thought was scummy in his/her behaviour. Also, Seeker, why did you go after Justin\_Credible (for saying I might be ‘hiding in plain sight’) and then basically use the same reason (except even vaguer) for going after me? That doesn’t really make sense. [/QUOTE] Telcontar does not respond directly– he posts an hour later and says something about **Freudian Slit** , and says **Daphne** is “generating a lot of dissension” while still saying she’s the most suspicious poster. In post #309 , **Zeriel** posts a long post about the math behind no-lynch (which math I’m totally not getting into at all in this post because I think it’s a dead issue and confuses the analysis) and **Telcontar** says not much: > [@](#): > > I really don’t get your hostility. We have a difference of opinion about whether to do no-lynch now or later. So what? #342 **Scuba Ben** says the players to watch are **Daphne, Telcontar, Seeker** , and **Lemur** He then gets eaten. Immediately after he is eaten, **Telcontar** is the first to post (#445): > [@](#): > > Looks like a standard kill of an experienced player. Scuba didn’t mention any meaningful suspicions or the list. Their only non-november vote was self-described as random. #466, after **Justin Credible** brings up the list of “posters to watch,” **Telcontar** disagrees that it is significant and gets back after **Daphne** : > [@](#): > > I think that post was just a list of people who’d gotten votes. Though I’d be surprised if one of the other three wasn’t a wolf (the odds are mildly in favor of any group of three active players containing a wolf), I don’t take that too seriously on face. > > Speaking of being concerned about “me too” behavior, I’m a little worried about Daphe’s quick join to fluiddruid’s post. Yes Freudian Slit is potentially worrisome, but I was more tickled by Daphne. > test Dapheblack Then yr. humble narrator says that seems fishy in post 469 and asks for more: [QUOTE=humble narrator] And I, in turn, am a little concerned about the fact that you’re still hammering on DaphneBlack even though from my perspective there’s no way she’s had anything like the most anti-town approach thus far. She’s posting substantively and hasn’t really, to my mind, made any “huh?” leaps in logic the way several posters have. I’m afraid that at this point, my vote is Test Telcontar Vote Telcontar keeping in mind that it’s early yet, and I’d definitely like to hear more about this “tickling” sensation. [/QUOTE] **Telcontar** does not respond at this time. Then **AllWalker** brings up the same kinds of points and **Mahaloth** joins in, so \*\*Telcontar \*\*responds, #502: > [@](#): > > Quote: > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by AllWalker > > > > You can change my vote, Telcontar, if you can adequately explain the following: > > > > 1. Why you found Daphne suspicious > > 2. Why you still find Daphne suspicious (a gut feeling might explain (1), but it is not enough for (2) as well > > 3. Why, with your initial and continuing mistrust for her, you did not vote to have her lynched. > > > > I await your response. > > 1.) I think Daphne is trying to dominate the discussion. She seemed eager to cast suspicion and was very defensive early on, even though attacks are to be expected. She also seems to be very quick to judge, which is unhelpful. All tells are fairly weak at this point. There is also the point rexnervous made about gamesmanship. I get the sense that Daphne is getting more attention, positive and negative, than she deserves on face. Something feels really odd there. > 2.) Err, it’s only been a day? It’s not like I’ve been hammering on her for 3 rounds with nary a reason. I have more cause to be suspicious of her than anyone else, that’s enough. > 3.) Because we’d agreed to lynch who we tested, and that was november. I’d rather have tested Daphne once it became clear november would be replaced (I think my final vote was to that effect) but once november was tested I went with the plan. > > I’m a little worried that the town is splitting into factions (and i don’t mean farmer/rancher). None of us should be very trusting at this point. I’d also like to agree with the people who say we should not be claiming roles without cause. Right before being tested, yes. When people are talking about testing you, no. Next he posts a wikipedia article about gamesmanship to show **Daphne** what he means by accusing her of same. **Daphne** says what are you talking about, what did I do? Telcontar doesn’t answer **Daphne** , but posts an hour later to ask a question that has the effect of encouraging the whole wolves can be farmers/ranchers discussion to continue (#510), then says he thinks that it’s a non-issue and ends on a familiar note, saying the only thing **Seeker** has done wrong is be suspicious of **Daphne**. Then, in post 536, when he is tied for the lead to be tested, he switches votes from **Daphne** to **Freudian** , and I ask him about it - if you suspect **Daphne** primarily, why switch to another person in fear of werewolf vote-wrangling? He responds in detail, post 563: > [@](#): > > Good post overall. > > I’m faced with choosing the best of several bad options. It seems like the only plausible test candidates for tomorrow are myself, seeker, and Freudian. > 1.) I think this is really dangerous. We’ve eliminated 3/4 of the potential pool without any good cause. > 2.) being stuck with these options, I have a chance to break a temporary tie and maybe create some momentum. I know that i’m innocent and that testing me would be a complete waste. I’ve seen absolutely no reason to think seeker is a wolf; in fact those trying to get him killed are making such silly arguments that I’m much more suspicious of them. That leaves Freudian. Though I’m reluctant to side with Daphne, I’m no reason to be certain she’s a wold, just suspicious. thus I can’t ignore my best plausible target just because she agrees with me. Also there’s a possibility that they’re playing some weird deep mindgame together and are both wolves :-P. > > Honestly I’d be happy to test a random dice roll of the people voting for seeker, but that’s simply not going to happen Next serious action: 21 minutes before the testerizer results come in, which is post 602, he then unvotes **Freudian** with no discussion– so he ends up with no vote at all for the testerizer after breaking the tie originally in favor of **Freudian** ’s test – he explains that it was strategic and he was taking a “wait and see” approach, and that he was mistaken about the time the test would go through (10 AM vs. 10 PM, which confusion he did cop to in advance, so don’t read this as me saying it was feigned). post 652 and later 706 and 707 – **Ichini** , who will later be eaten, says he is certain **Seeker** and/or **Telcontar** are wolves. In post 682 poor, soon to be dead \*\*Freudian Slit \*\*posts a long review of **Telcontar** ’s posts In response to all of this, post 711 by **Telcontar** says **Ichini** is bad at the game and calls it a paranoid rant (and explains more about his perspective on the no-lynch thing). Then an argument about the no-lynch thing for a while – involved parties are **Adrian** and **fluiddruid** Then **AllWalker** accuses **Telcontar** and calls him pendo, which I don’t know what that means. Then **Ichini** in #723 asks **Telcontar** _how_ his case is weak against other players. Then young heroic **Ichini** is devoured by the ravening mongrels. \*\* Telcontar\*\* never responds to the last question, perhaps because his audience has been, er, scattered, but again in response to a suggestion ( by **Oredigger** , #769) that the last accusation made by the departed is significant, he says that’s not very likely. #775 is another post by **Telcontar** basically saying “I’m not responding to this kind of argument” because he’s getting tired of talking about his earlier no-lynch points. He’s also kind of mean to **Daphne**. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by DaphneBlack > > I think that between Seeker and Telcontar, Telcontar is the more suspicious. His attacks on me were not convincing nor original; he doesn’t seem to have really looked much at most of the players in the game. His no-lynch idea was anti-town; his attitude seems to be that we should all just listen to him and follow his ideas. Continuing to try to bully people into applying his theories (which, as fluiddruid pointed out, only make sense in a purely random context) on Day Three is not helping and is pretty scummy. > > As I said, I’m not going to argue this anymore this game. You’re either not paying attention or deliberately misrepresenting my argument and it’s not worth pressing the point. You are, however, wrong that it was an anti-town suggestion. In post #795 he does not respond to further accusations ( **Adrian, Mahaloth, Justin Credible** , but makes some of his own – against **Zeriel** and **Elendil’s Heir**. **AllWalker** asks him a direct question in #797 about a point **T** had made regarding rancher/farmer balance, but receives no answer. Post #830 **Telcontar** says > [@](#): > > Testing me is a waste of time. Not much more to it than that. > > I’m worried by the way things become conventional wisdom in this game without much discussion. Lots of “well, I agree with X’s points about how such and such is scummy,” very little independent thinking. Very worrisome considering that the wolves presumably are competent, even if we are not. Seriously people, think a bit. It’s also why I’ve stopped responding to the attacks; there’s just nothing worth rebutting. I haven’t seen a good case against me in 50 posts. Enter then the **Seeker** clusterfuck, and we’re up to date. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/976 "2009-03-06T01:22:11Z")
> [@AllWalker](#): > > Here’s a thought I am just throwing out there - perhaps we should look at people who attract little suspicion, but who also post a lot. These people are being vocal yet somehow avoiding attention, and so it might be worth looking into. > > Here’s what I have: > **Mahaloth** - 2nd in post count (excluding **pedescribe** ) but not accused of much Yeah, I haven’t drawn a lot of fire for some reason. I’ve tried to be straight forward and aside from a few goofy statements, I think my posts have not been scummy. If someone wants to accuse me, please base it on something more than me not attracting accusations. If somehow has a good reason to think me of scum, let me know. But please don’t wait until tomorrow(small t) at 11:00 a.m. I can’t be expected to defend myself adequately at the last second. I hope the wolves aren’t primarily made of quasi-lurkers. That’d be a disappointing way to lose(assuming we never lynch them). ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/977 "2009-03-06T01:24:01Z")
Fuck. You wouldn’t believe how long I formatted and previewed, and I still screwed up the first quote and divided it wrong. It should read like this: [QUOTE=Daphne] > [@Telcontar](#): > > Re: who to test. > Daphe seems to be responding very strongly to any suggestion that she might be suspicious and acting rather…high strung about all of this (note the fairly random attack on Seeker and the very high post count). I think that makes her the best target for today given that november is being replaced. I’m not ‘very strongly to any suggestion that she might be suspicious’, I am answering people’s vague attacks. It is not pro-town to just sit around and let people attack you for no good reason. I’m the only person who’s being attacked, really, and the reasons are _bad_. My attack on Seeker is _not_ random – I was very specific about what I thought was scummy in his/her behaviour. Also, Seeker, why did you go after Justin\_Credible (for saying I might be ‘hiding in plain sight’) and then basically use the same reason (except even vaguer) for going after me? That doesn’t really make sense. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![DaphneBlack](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/daphneblack/32/5389_2.png) [@DaphneBlack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaphneBlack)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/978 "2009-03-06T01:35:43Z")
> [@AllWalker](#): > > Here’s a thought I am just throwing out there - perhaps we should look at people who attract little suspicion, but who also post a lot. These people are being vocal yet somehow avoiding attention, and so it might be worth looking into. > > Here’s what I have: > **Mahaloth** - 2nd in post count (excluding **pedescribe** ) but not accused of much > **rexnervous** - 4th in post count, not accused of much > **Oredigger** - 7th in post count, not accused of much > **Jimmy** and **AllWalker** - tied 8th, not accused of much > After that we have **[Undecided] Adrian** and **JC** , respectively, who have not been accused of much. > > People who attract suspicion might post a lot in the first place, and then have to post more in order to argue their case. But there seems to be a lot of moderate to heavy posters who are flying under everyone’s radars. Perhaps this needs addressing? I agree, **AllWalker** , as I believe I’ve said several times. I think **Oredigger** has, as I said, been very vocal and throwing out a lot of ideas which have gotten heat. We’ve mostly let him slide on that, on the principle that bad/unpopular ideas are not necessarily scummy (whilst Telcontar has attracted heat for his one bad idea). But I’m having second thoughts with him at this point. Rex, Mahaloth, [Undecided] Adrian, and Justin seem to have avoided taking a controversial or loud position on anything. I’m more suspicious of the last two than the first two, mainly due to their place so squarely mid-range. Any of these should be examined more carefully (I looked at Adrian yesterday, and was pinged, as I said, by his seeming insistence that he was invisible but no steps seemed to be taken to really correct that by him). Jimmy and AllWalker I’m not sure of. They’ve been pretyt helpful but rarely gotten into controversy (though I see Jimmy is taking up arms against Telcontar). So of this group, the two biggest _pings_ I’ve had are **Oredigger** (but I can’t really back that up at this point) and **Adrian** (which I think can be better documented, but is not exactly a lot to go on). ---
**Author:** ![DaphneBlack](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/daphneblack/32/5389_2.png) [@DaphneBlack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaphneBlack)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/979 "2009-03-06T01:45:45Z")
**Jimmy** , thanks for that recap. It gets to a lot of what I have said, but is much more articulate than I have been! His ever-lasting suspicion of me could go either way. I’ve seen it done by town and by scum (usually with a lot of success). His ‘being mean’ to me and others goes to what I’ve been saying about tone, but again I don’t know that it is scummy – what it is is controlling. He accused me of trying to ‘dominate’ the discussion, but I think he’s been trying to control it, by refusing to answer and by his over-confident tone at times. It _is_ very scummy not to answer question directly asked, especially when asked multiple times. I keep going back and forth on this, which I guess is the curse of mafia. **Mahaloth** , I looked back over your posts yesterday and nothing particularly scummy or townie really jumped out at me. who are your top suspects at the moment, other than Seeker or Telcontar? ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [March 6, 2009, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692/980 "2009-03-06T01:56:05Z")
> [@DaphneBlack](#): > > His ‘being mean’ to me and others goes to what I’ve been saying about tone, but again I don’t know that it is scummy – what it is is controlling. He accused me of trying to ‘dominate’ the discussion, but I think he’s been trying to control it, by refusing to answer and by his over-confident tone at times. It _is_ very scummy not to answer question directly asked, especially when asked multiple times. > > I keep going back and forth on this, which I guess is the curse of mafia. That’s the crux of it, I think. How many werewolf points does one get for being kind of irritable? I would go so far as to say none at all, _except_ in the event that one’s irritability serves as a screen for a failure to really address criticism. In **Telcontar’s** defense is the point that, well, the questions maybe weren’t very pointed ones, or were non-starters, or at least **Telcontar** thought they were non-starters, and why should he have to entertain them when he’s got serious wolf-hunting to do (which I think is a fair assessment of his stance). But courtesy isn’t really the issue when the point of a question isn’t personal edification, it’s to try to play the game. I think it’s fair to say that several times **Telcontar** has handwaved direct questions or direct arguments aimed at himself, and that – not the demeanor which accompanied the handwaving – is an approach that hurts the town in general. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692.md?page=48) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/werewolf-mafia-the-split-signups-in-progress/485692.md?page=50)