Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT FIVE

[JSexton]

@amrussell

Regarding **Blam’s **PM quotes yesterday - my instinct is that they were all accurate quotes. It was in **Blam’s **interest to confirm himself by giving us verifiable facts. So I’m betting that pedescribe was protected on Night One (from Blam, as it turns out) and obviously **Cookies **came out as he said, although that wasn’t as strong a prediction as he had hoped. This is a point in favour of dotchan. I won’t go so far as to say it’s complete confirmation, but it looks good.

The flaw in this idea is this: We know he was a SK. It’s likely that he tried to kill more than once, al though he may have had supplemental powers, I really don’t think that he didn’t even attempt a kill for three days. I agree that he would want to be as honest as possible, but if he had more failed kills, he couldn’t very well admit to them.

So scum were either bussing macey, making throwaway votes, or not voting. At a guess, I’m going to say 0-2 scum in the not-**macey **pile, 0-2 in the not-voting pile and 0-3 in the **macey **pile.

Was this supposed to be helpful? I can’t help but think of ads that pitch “Save up to 20% or more!”.

An embarrassingly large group of non-voters. Are scum more likely to not vote? Yes, if there was a large town on town wagon building, and they didn’t have time to fake a case against someone else.

What? Why would scum fake a case on someone if a townie was already being bandwagoned? What’s the motivation there?

**JSexton **voted 6th on macey, then didn’t vote for two days. Then came out to vote for 5th for Blam. That could look a lot like someone keeping his nose clean.

Or it might be indicative of my playstyle. Once I find a place for a vote, it tends to stay there until that player is dead, or I’ve been given a REALLY good reason to unvote. And until I have a reason (or want to gambit, admittedly) my vote goes no where. With these short days, I often haven’t found a place I’m happy voting.

**Millit the Frail **has also been very bandwagon happy, particularly the two PFK votes. I might almost find this more interesting than I should, because other than that I don’t have much of an impression.

It’s interesting that you found a way to smudge both me a Millit for essentially opposite behavior. Cookies’s comment about seeing what sticks is starting to resonate with me.

A series of votes that blend in with the crowd, coupled with a general lack of pro-town activity, gives me the sense of somebody keeping her head down carefully.

For example, consider this first Day Four post, refuting Almost Human’s vote:

@Hockey Monkey

That’s all you got? I admit I haven’t been all that active, but most of it was during the holidays. When I voted for Jsexton I said myself it was a me too vote. Then I unvoted and voted Macey. Then I hounded peeker about his confession, but because I was busy at work, I missed the opportunity to vote for him. Sorry! Then today I said that Cookies claim stunk. Not exactly insubstantial. You got me on that Day One me too first vote of the game though.

So: Admits to low activity and me too voting. Voted macey, hounded the PFK, attacked Cookies claim - nothing that it isn’t plausible scum behaviour.

Sure, it’s plausible scum behavior…but it’s also plausible town behavior, isn’t it? I don’t see any of that (aside from low posting (and it’s not THAT low)) as being an actual scum tell. It’s neutral at best, but you’re treating it like a rubber stamp for scum.

There’s nothing inherently scummy about building a case on someone who turns out to be town (mason in this case), but some cases look more contrived than others. This one looks shaky as hell, and I’m doubting the sincerity of it.