# Mafia: Evil Dead - DAY/NIGHT ONE **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [December 19, 2008, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854 "2008-12-19T03:11:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 307
**Author:** ![Natlaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a88e57/32.png) [@Natlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Natlaw)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2008, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854/307 "2008-12-26T23:52:37Z")
> [@bufftabby](#): > > I’m not saying it’s suspicious just yet, but I am starting to wonder about the folks who are still discussing the short-lived idea of claiming targets. I’m starting to feel like it’s just noise disguised as content. I could be wrong, but it’s still starting to make me wonder. > \ It is being discussed (at least by me) to find out why **Pleonast** supported a variant. Since he is voted for by lynch-leader **Thing Fish** , I think is worth keeping them both talking about it. I’m not saying it’s suspicious, but your last posts were correcting a typo, fluff and discussing the even shorter lived a/b claim: aka noise by your definition. To be clear: I don’t find your noise itself suspicious, but find it suspicious you find you own kind of posts suspicious. _So Should I See you as a Sneaky Suspicious Scummy, or Ponder if you Portray a Paranoid Pro-town Player?_ I posted a quick recap of the macey voters, but since we’ll have more information at dawn, I’m waiting for that before complete analysis. > [@Natlaw](#): > > Voters who completely ignored macey: bufftabby, peekercpa, DiggitCamara. **Hawkeyeop** , I like how I’m slightly pro-town, but mildly pro-scum :). But what I wanted to ask: if voting for macey is townie and saying it’s suspicious but not voting scummy, where do the people fall on your scale who ignored it completely? --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-evil-dead-day-night-one/477854)._