# You-Solve-It Mafia Game **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 11, 2007, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636 "2007-12-11T18:21:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 79
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1561 "2008-02-11T18:46:42Z")
[QUOTE=Hockey Monkey] My name is \*\*Hockey Monkey \*\* and I approved this message. [/QUOTE] Two thoughts: a) This is the first time in history this phrase has been used with a message saying “ **Don’t** vote for me.” b) Whenever you hear that phrase, you know that the preceding message is full of lies and half-truths. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1562 "2008-02-11T18:51:17Z")
Yeah! Actual conversation! OK Hockey, I’m willing to listen to you. Like I said in my thread analysis, everyone has done some scummy things. For instance, Rysto defended OAOW and discouraged the vote against him back in post 699. But, HNC jumped right in afterward and agreed. To me, that seemed more like scum jumping in to agree with a townie (who happened to have a scummy opinion) than scum agreeing with scum. From my reread, it seems to me that Hawkeye and Hockey are on one team and Rysto and Sach are on the opposite team. So, I say we either lynch Hockey or Rysto today - that should tell us who to lynch tomorrow. I will be willing to switch my vote depending on what Rysto’s Hockey case says. ---
**Author:** ![Hawkeyeop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/958977/32.png) [@Hawkeyeop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hawkeyeop)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1563 "2008-02-11T18:59:01Z")
[QUOTE=brewha] Yeah! Actual conversation! OK Hockey, I’m willing to listen to you. Like I said in my thread analysis, everyone has done some scummy things. For instance, Rysto defended OAOW and discouraged the vote against him back in post 699. But, HNC jumped right in afterward and agreed. To me, that seemed more like scum jumping in to agree with a townie (who happened to have a scummy opinion) than scum agreeing with scum. From my reread, it seems to me that Hawkeye and Hockey are on one team and Rysto and Sach are on the opposite team. So, I say we either lynch Hockey or Rysto today - that should tell us who to lynch tomorrow. I will be willing to switch my vote depending on what Rysto’s Hockey case says. [/QUOTE] So, under your plan, if one of Pleo, Faithfool, or you is scum, we are guaranteed a loss. ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1564 "2008-02-11T19:50:40Z")
Hawkeye, you’re almost as frustrating as …! It’s maddening how you assume you know what I mean and then just put those words in my mouth. You’re implying that I said, “kill Rysto, if he’s town - kill Hawkeye and Hockey, If he’s scum, kill Sach”. I said no such thing. I said we lynch one of them - Depending on the outcome of that lynch, we talk about what to do the next day. I wanted to get my beliefs of whose scum and town out in the open in case I’m lynched today or scum killed tonight. It would be quite helpful if everyone else would post who they trust and distrust instead of posting misleading summaries of other’s ideas. How about it Hawkeye? Where’s your allegiance? ---
**Author:** ![Hawkeyeop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/958977/32.png) [@Hawkeyeop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hawkeyeop)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1565 "2008-02-11T20:00:16Z")
[QUOTE=brewha] So, I say we either lynch Hockey or Rysto today - that should tell us who to lynch tomorrow. [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > I said we lynch one of them - Depending on the outcome of that lynch, we talk about what to do the next day You did not say it would give us something to discuss the next day. You said, categorically, it will “tell us who to lynch tomorrow” . ---
**Author:** ![Hockey\_Monkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a183cd/32.png) [@Hockey\_Monkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hockey_Monkey)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1566 "2008-02-11T20:11:36Z")
[QUOTE=Hawkeyeop] You did not say it would give us something to discuss the next day. You said, categorically, it will “tell us who to lynch tomorrow” . [/QUOTE] And if \*\*Brewha \*\* is scum, and \*\*Rysto \*\* and I turn out to be vehemently opposed townies, this plan has the scum winning. I dislike linking two people together because of this. Invariably the two both turn out to be town and the crowd goes “oops!”. Me being town does not automatically make **Rysto** , or anyone else for that matter, scum. Even though I think \*\*Rysto \*\* is scum at this point, make your own decisions on who to lynch when I am revealed as a loyal associate. ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1567 "2008-02-11T20:45:52Z")
I didn’t know that my opinion was so highly regarded that me merely saying it would make it happen! 🙂 All snarkiness aside, I see how my words could have been misread. I should have prefaced my statement with some type of disclaimer saying that the following are my beliefs and are in no way supported by the town, scum, or any other logical asscociation. I found it odd that Rysto seemed eager to lynch Hawkeye - even stating that he was sure Hawkeye was scum - but didn’t vote for him. Even after I made the first vote, he still didn’t vote for him. I also thought it was odd that he was Hockey was the other scum and that there was no chance that Sach could be the other one - at least he didnt’ comment on it. Sach - AFAIK - hasn’t posted at all today. Still waiting on Rysto’s analysis of Hockey, but if scum haven’t voted yet and Hockey is town, we could have an insta lynch. So, for now, Unvote Hockey Monkey I really need to make up my mine - I know. ---
**Author:** ![Hockey\_Monkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a183cd/32.png) [@Hockey\_Monkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hockey_Monkey)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1568 "2008-02-11T20:54:16Z")
(oog) A little extra vitriol for Rysto - The Senators got Commodore and Stillman - two of my favorite Canes. :::shakes fist::: Damn you Ottawa! (game on) ---
**Author:** ![Hawkeyeop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/958977/32.png) [@Hawkeyeop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hawkeyeop)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1569 "2008-02-11T21:00:05Z")
So what does everyone think about Sach. The things that bother me are: 1. His vote for Brewha on day 6 2. He had a revealed trait on his dossier (assuming that we were right about the pig trait). No one else had that trait. We never followed up on it. 3. He argued against revealing dossiers. 4. Zuma was suspicious of his playing style. I don’t really know Sach’s playing style very well, but we do know that Zuma is trustworthy. 5. He has offered very little analysis of late and is currently MIA. He has however posted a vote count on the other board. I can probably find more if I comb through the thread. However, I tried doing that Brewha and ended only getting halfway through and getting nothing posted, so I’m going for quick over nothing. ---
**Author:** ![brewha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@brewha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brewha)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1570 "2008-02-11T21:11:25Z")
This is the kind of analysis that is helpful. I too think that there is something suspicious about Sach. If you look back at my page of chickenscratches, I noted that on two different occasions Zuma expressed her distrust toward Sach. Also, Sach posted his distrust list - Zuma was at the top, followed by me then Faithfool. OTOH, Sach did vote for OAOW and Frued. ---
**Author:** ![Hawkeyeop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/958977/32.png) [@Hawkeyeop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hawkeyeop)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1571 "2008-02-11T21:21:30Z")
[QUOTE=brewha] This is the kind of analysis that is helpful. [/QUOTE] How dare you call me helpful!!! Oh what? Right. Thanks. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![sachertorte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sachertorte/32/3727_2.png) [@sachertorte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sachertorte)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1572 "2008-02-11T21:45:40Z")
Hi. I’m here, but I don’t have a whole lot of time today to devote to game playing. I’ve been trying to get more work done this month. Unfortunately I have a meeting in 30 minutes. Right now I don’t know what to do. Well, I know that I _should_ be re-reading the thread, but I just haven’t had time. I’m wary of just throwing out a vote without thinking about it more, which I know I should have been doing for the past several days, but I haven’t. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1573 "2008-02-11T22:00:11Z")
[QUOTE=Hockey Monkey] (oog) A little extra vitriol for Rysto - The Senators got Commodore and Stillman - two of my favorite Canes. :::shakes fist::: Damn you Ottawa! (game on) [/QUOTE] Holy shit! (case is being done and being edited, but don’t expect much new material) ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1574 "2008-02-11T22:17:54Z")
Before I start my case, I note with displeasure that **brewha** ’s name has _once again_ come up. This is beyond ridiculous, people. **zuma** was one of **brewha** ’s biggest supporters, and now he’s dead. A vote for **brewha** is exactly what the scum are looking for. I realize that nobody’s actually voted for him yet, but I think that a pre-emptive strike is necessary with **sachertorte** and **faithfool** yet to vote. [QUOTE=brewha] I will be willing to switch my vote depending on what Rysto’s Hockey case says. [/QUOTE] I’m afraid that you’re about to be disappointed; I haven’t found anything really new. I thought that I had found a smoking gun on Day 1 – it looked as though **HM** had betrayed knowledge about **Santos** ’s dossier that she shouldn’t have had – but I dug deeper and discovered that it was perfectly legitimate that she would know. But this segues nicely into the origins of my case against **Hawkeyeop** and **Hockey Monkey**. You see, in the wake of the **Diomedes** disaster, I new that I was in trouble. I had a well-deserved reputation for being a lurker and I had just led a very late bandwagon against a Townie. I figured that I would be a very attractive lynch candidate for the scum: who could blame them for leading a lynch against somebody who looked so scummy? So I decided to hold back on Day 6. I had no real suspects at the time anyway, and I wanted to see if any of the scum would tip their hand in trying to build a case against me. Just about everybody FOS’ed me, which is nothing more than I expected. Then [**Hawkeyeop**](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=447411&page=28&pp=50) tried to build a case based on the fact that I was wary about revealing dossiers. Go back and re-read Day 1. **Not a single confirmed scum argued against revealing.**** Hawkeyeop **threw out the absurd theory that I was being used as a weather vane to gauge the town’s opposition to the idea. Never mind that I didn’t bring up the idea. Never mind that I argued against long after some scum argued for reveals. This is not pro-town behaviour: as I said above, a pro-town move is to come up with a theory and then investigate it. Smudging a player by throwing out a theory without thinking it through? That’s scummy, especially from my perspective, because I know that I am town. I realize that this is not a compelling argument for the rest of you, because you don’t know my alignment. But I want to give you a feel for how and why I developed my theory against** Hazel **,** Hawk **and** Hockey**. The other post that really jumped out at me was [**Hockey Monkey**](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9423326&postcount=1363)’s. Voting with just “let’s try and get this bandwagon started” looks bad. But she completely ignored my [previous post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9405255&postcount=1228) in the thread, in which I reiterated my suspicions of **Dio** , and mentioned some new things that had jumped out at me. **HM** has made no mention of this whatsoever. She keeps trying to give the impression that I voted for no reason at all. This is doubly scummy: not only has she not bothered to investigate her theory, she hasn’t considered exculpatory evidence even after [I pointed it out.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9430599&postcount=1406) Again, this looks much more convincing from my perspective, because I know that I’m not town. And so I probably shouldn’t have been as surprised as I was on Day 6 when the leading candidates ended being neither of my prime suspects. I wasn’t happy. From my perspective, I had not been able to see any good argument against **brewha** since Day 3 ended(and if memory serves, I was mostly on the **brewha** bandwagon in Day 3 due to pure inertia: nobody else had anywhere near enough votes against them). **Hazel** ’s Day 5 vote made no sense to me unless she was town: even if **brewha** were scum, placing a first vote late in the Day made little sense if she was going to save herself. I argued heavily against both lynches, challenging people to come up with a believable theory to explain the Day 5 vote. I threw out an idea of my own: things might make sense if the other two scum were already on the **brewha** bandwagon. That’s the moment where things went _click_ for me. I knew who was already on the **brewha** bandwagon: **Hawkeyeop** and **Hockey Monkey**. Their dogged pursuit of **brewha** was a major reason why I trusted him. As I’ve mentioned before, I’m a cautious player by nature. Just **Pleonast** about what my major worry was when I was a witch in his Conspiracy game: I was constantly saying that above all, we had to be careful not to vote as a bloc. Too often masons fall into that trap. I could easily understand voting as a bloc worrying scum as well. And so I looked back at Day 5 when **Hazel** voted, and lo and behold, the only other players with votes against them were **Hockey** , **Hawkeye** and **faithfool**. **faithfool** was not a popular target, and a vote for either of her fellow scum could lead to a disastrous bandwagon against scum. So she did the only thing she could, and voted for somebody else. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. **Hazel’s vote on Day 5 only makes sense if two of Hockey Monkey, Hawkeyeop and faithfool are scum**. Several people have brought up how scummy **Hazel** ’s vote record is. This doesn’t make much sense: **Hazel** ’s played scum before and she isn’t an idiot. So why was she voting in such a scummy manner? Easy, because her fellow scum were almost always on bandwagons already. She had to avoid the bandwagons to avoid voting with her fellow scum. Again, this is only true if **Hockey Monkey** and **Hawkeyeop** are scum. Her pre-Day 5 voting record does not make as much sense if **faithfool** is scum. **Hockey Monkey** ’s [vote on Hazel](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9435524&postcount=1464) stinks to high heaven. It’s 11:30 on a Sunday night. Why on earth is she starting the 12-hour clock at that time? That’s absolutely not pro-Town, and it stinks even worse because **Hazel** ended up being scum. No scum would be stupid enough to start the clock on a townie like that. But scum might try it on another scum to gain pro-town points with the rest of the Town. I can’t think of any reason to start the clock like that except to try and mess with my head: I was convinced that both of them are scum, so being the hammer on **Hazel** could have been an attempt to convince me that either **Hazel** or **Hockey** was town. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1575 "2008-02-11T22:19:57Z")
I want to look at voting record a different way, by person rather than Day. I hope I got this right (my mind keeps conflating Hawkeye and Hockey!). **brewha** 3rd MHaye (Lynch) (No Vote) 1st Hawkeye (Single) 2nd Freud (Lynch) 6th Diomedes (Lynch, Hammer) 3rd Hazel (Lynch) **faith** 1st Hal (Single) 8th OaOW (Lynch, Hammer) 1st Diomedes 8th Freud (Lynch, Post-Hammer) 1st brewha (Single) 3rd brewha **Hawkeye** 6th MHaye (Lynch) 2nd OaOW (Lynch) 3rd brewha 7th Freud (Lynch, Hammer) 3rd Diomedes (Lynch) 1st brewha **Hockey** 10th MHaye (Lynch, Hammer) 7th OaOW (Lynch) 2nd brewha 1st brewha 4th Hazel 5th Hazel (Lynch, Hammer) **Pleonast** 9th MHaye (Lynch) (No Vote) 7th brewha 3rd brewha 1st Hazel 1st Hazel (Lynch) **Rysto** (No Vote) 1st Diomedes (Single) 5th brewha 6th Freud (Lynch) 2nd Diomedes (Lynch) 4th Hazel (Lynch) **sach** 1st zuma 3rd OaOW (Lynch) 1st brewha 5th Freud (Lynch) 5th Diomedes (Lynch) 3rd brewha Analysis in a bit once I ponder this some more. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1576 "2008-02-11T22:36:50Z")
[QUOTE=Hockey Monkey] I am one of 4 people who had/have 3 unique dossier items. Earlier in the game I hypothesised that those people were town. My reasons for that were that 1) I am town, and 2) the reason I thought we had more unique items was that scum also shared some but covered them up, leaving us more vulnerable if a killer showed one of those traits. I’m the only one left out of the 4 and the other three have proven to be town, so I know my theory was correct. \*\*Storyteller, ShadowFacts, and Zuma \*\* were the other three. [/quote] This is a really convenient theory for you. Of course, it’s established that you knew the origin of the traits before you revealed your own, so you could have easily made up a bunch of new traits from the 2 threads as well as copying some previous ones. This kind of dossier analysis is crap. We can’t assume anything from the dossiers, because scum lie. Besides, if you’re scum, you could just as easily have taken some random fact about your dossier, made-up or not, that you happen to share with dead townies. This is not a compelling argument. > [@](#): > > I thought dossier revelation was good for the town, I lobbied for \*\*OAOW’s \*\* lynch as well as **Hazel’s**. I wasn’t sure about **Freudian** , but I would have moved my vote to her if necessary to make sure there was a lynch. I was livid over the No-Lynch. I have doggedly stood by my beliefs of who is scum until arguments are made to change my mind. I’m not so set that I cannot be moved. Except when it comes to **brewha** , of course. > [@](#): > > \*\*Rysto, \*\* on the other hand was anti- dossier reveal, I was _wary_ about dossier reveals. Here’s what I said: > [@Rysto](#): > > Well, the scum are just going to lie about their dossiers. Why wouldn’t they? Unless there’s some hidden mechanism in the game for revealing living players’ dossiers, we’d never catch anybody in a lie, either. > > The trouble we have with the dossiers is that we don’t know exactly how they’re going to play into this game – there’s that nagging 7% of the game that’s been left hidden. So, absent a good reason to reveal the dossiers, I’d be wary of revealing them myself. And what’s happened? Yeah, we caught **OAOW** , but he self-hammered, for cripes’ sake. We were meant to catch him. Every other scum has lied about their dossiers and so revealing them hasn’t done anything for us since the **OAOW** lynch. We’ve lynched as least as many townies based on dossier analysis as we have scum. > [@Hockey Monkey](#): > > lurky, I’ve posted more than **Pleonast** , **faithfool** and **sachertorte** > [@](#): > > and has had a scummy vote pattern, especially with the \*\*Diomedes \*\* lynch. You can’t just throw crap out like this. Let’s see some analysis. What in my vote pattern is scummy? I’ll give you the **Dio** lynch; that looks very bad on me. But what else? This is the first time I’ve seen anybody say that my voting pattern as a whole. On that note: > [@Hockey Monkey](#): > > My first vote for the day will be > > a vote for Rysto for the same reason I voted for him yesterDay. Let’s start getting votes out people, and discuss what we are going to do. Ok, let’s go back to Day 6 and see those reasons > [@](#): > > What game are you reading? I started the day with a vote on the record! Do I need to make or change my vote every time I am considering my options? The statement you gave above seems intentionally misleading. I don’t see how you can say I’ve had no votes on the record. I just unvoted brewha not more than an hour or so ago. > > So, I’ll replace that one now. > > vote Rysto Hm, that doesn’t help. Let’s go further back. > [@](#): > > 'm contemplating switching my vote over to Rysto right now. The dossier reveal stance bothers me, but his vote on Diomedes is the cincher for me. Brewha, you have made some compelling pleas that are sounding more and more townie to me, and I would be willing to spare you in favor of either Rysto or Hazel today, so long as we don’t consider you “confirmed” if we do so. You are still very very high on my suspect list. I still don’t see how you are still alive if you are town. > [@](#): > > I switched votes because it was looking like no one else was going to vote brewha with me. It was a heavy sigh that conveyed my reluctance to switch because dammit, I’ve put in a lot of effort. Although, I do find brewha and HNC about equally scummy. > > I think Rysto’s “let’s get this bandwagon started” vote is just about the scummiest scum thing I’ve ever seen a scummy scum do. > > So today, I will be equally joyful to toss brewha, HNC, or Rysto. That’s quite a comprehensive case you have there, **Hockey Monkey**. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1577 "2008-02-11T22:56:55Z")
[QUOTE=Hawkeyeop] So what does everyone think about Sach. The things that bother me are: 1. His vote for Brewha on day 6 [/quote] Ok, if voting for **brewha** is scummy now, there are a few people I’d like to see lynched first. Can you guess who they are? > [@](#): > > 1. He had a revealed trait on his dossier (assuming that we were right about the pig trait). No one else had that trait. We never followed up on it. … You want to lynch **sachertorte** because he matches **one** trait of the second killer? The killer who was almost certainly **Freudian Slit**? Do you know who else matched a trait from that killer? **Hockey Monkey**. But as I’ve said, this kind of dossier analysis is crap, because scum lie. > [@](#): > > 1. He argued against revealing dossiers. This _again_? > [@](#): > > 1. Zuma was suspicious of his playing style. I don’t really know Sach’s playing style very well, but we do know that Zuma is trustworthy. And **storyteller** was suspicious of **Diomedes**. Townies sometimes suspect townies, and sometimes they suspect scum. > [@](#): > > 1. He has offered very little analysis of late and is currently MIA. He has however posted a vote count on the other board. Again with the lynch lurkers bandwagon? This does not look good on you. Your manufactured cases are getting weaker and weaker, **Hawkeyeop**. > [@brewha](#): > > For instance, Rysto defended OAOW and discouraged the vote against him back in post 699. But, HNC jumped right in afterward and agreed. To me, that seemed more like scum jumping in to agree with a townie (who happened to have a scummy opinion) than scum agreeing with scum. I was initially concerned about the speed at which the bandwagon got steam. Speed lynches, in my experience, rarely work out well for the town, even if the target really is scum(see the first Mafia game for an example of this). I did eventually offer up a theory that might have cleared **OAOW** , but it was shot down right away. > [@](#): > > I found it odd that Rysto seemed eager to lynch Hawkeye - even stating that he was sure Hawkeye was scum - but didn’t vote for him. Even after I made the first vote, he still didn’t vote for him. Ever since I came up with my theory based on **Hazel** ’s vote history, I’ve found **Hockey Monkey** slightly scummier than **Hawkeyeop**. I’ve been [quite](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9437349&postcount=1478) [vocal](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9444932&postcount=1510) about this. > [@](#): > > I also thought it was odd that he was Hockey was the other scum and that there was no chance that Sach could be the other one - at least he didnt’ comment on it. Again, **sach** doesn’t fit my theory based on **Hazel** ’s voting patterns. Ok, I think that I’m all caught up. ---
**Author:** ![Hawkeyeop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/958977/32.png) [@Hawkeyeop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hawkeyeop)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1578 "2008-02-11T22:59:58Z")
[QUOTE=Rysto] Before I start my case, I note with displeasure that **brewha** ’s name has _once again_ come up. This is beyond ridiculous, people. **zuma** was one of **brewha** ’s biggest supporters, and now he’s dead. A vote for **brewha** is exactly what the scum are looking for. I realize that nobody’s actually voted for him yet, but I think that a pre-emptive strike is necessary with **sachertorte** and **faithfool** yet to vote. [/quote] Wait what? Zuma didn’t have perfect knowledge. His entire case for Brewha was that he didn’t believe scum would be 3 of the first 4 votes for a lynch candidate day one. If you disagree with that logic, then Brewha is a lynch candidate. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1579 "2008-02-11T23:02:24Z")
I don’t have anything comprehensive to say, just some observations. 1. **Hockey** and I have the same voting record (since I was voting OaOW until I stopped the clock). Not sure if this makes me more or less likely to keep my vote on her. 2. The Hammer voter for each of our five lynches is still alive: 1 Hockey on MHaye, 2 faith on OaOW, 4 Hawkeye on Freud, 5 brewha on Diomedes, 6 Hockey on Hazel. Very strange. Is this coincidence? Are Hammers more or less likely to be scum? 3. Everyone alive has voted for **brewha** (twice, except for **Rysto** ) and he is only living person anyone has voted for (all other vote getters are dead, except for brewha’s vote for Hawkeye). Again, no idea what this means. ---
**Author:** ![Rysto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecccb3/32.png) [@Rysto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rysto)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2008, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636/1580 "2008-02-11T23:03:21Z")
[QUOTE=Hawkeyeop] Wait what? Zuma didn’t have perfect knowledge. His entire case for Brewha was that he didn’t believe scum would be 3 of the first 4 votes for a lynch candidate day one. If you disagree with that logic, then Brewha is a lynch candidate. [/QUOTE] My point is that I think that one reason that **zuma** was killed was to remove an opponent to a **brewha** lynch, leaving behind enough players who voted **brewha** yesterday for a lynch toDay or toMorrow. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636.md?page=78) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-solve-it-mafia-game/429636.md?page=80)