# Mafia: The Thrill of the Chase \[Newbie Friendly!\] **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [November 20, 2011, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526 "2011-11-20T06:04:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 38
**Author:** ![fubbleskag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fubbleskag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fubbleskag)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/741 "2011-12-14T18:11:55Z")
> [@Mahaloth](#): > > I don’t think I’m reactionary or strange. I just think fubble made outrageous and false claims about me, with no citation, and it bothered me. It wasn’t “in game” claims, either, it was personal. And unprovoked. give it up, they’re on to us 😛 ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/742 "2011-12-14T19:22:13Z")
posting as I catch up Broken tag fixed in this quote > [@choie](#): > > Anyway. This actually reminds me of something **special ed** said (at least I think it was him): I mentioned four scenarios – > > 1. Town **Scathach** , Town **Svekj** ; **Svejk** switched his vote to **Inner** because he just didn’t like the bandwagon on **Scathach** and thought the case against **Inner** was stronger. > > 2. Town **Scathach** , Scum **Svejk** : **Svejk** thought **Scathach** was destined to be lynched (due to the rising groundswell of suspicion against her) and figured hoping off the bandwagon would make him look less scummy. OR, for some reason he felt **Inner** was more likely to be a power role. This strikes me as a very risky scenario since it does (and obviously _did_) make him gain more attention to himself. > > 3. Scum **Scathach** , Town **Svejk** : Really, same as option #1. > > 4. Scum **Scathatch** \*\*,\*\* Scum **Svejk** : Svejk was worried that Scathach was about to be lynched and decided to hop off the train and cause a new bandwagon on Inner. > > So special ed said he didn’t think there were equal chances of these scenarios being true, but I don’t think he elaborated on which he felt was most likely/unlikely. Could you do so now? Ditto anyone else who either a) has corrections to my suppositions or b) wants to offer ideas on these cases. I just don’t see the reasoning for the vote switch at that time if Svejk isn’t Scum. So I’m leaning that way. ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/743 "2011-12-14T19:25:12Z")
> [@fluiddruid](#): > > That’s not what I’m suggesting. As the whole of my post indicates, I think we have an SK, not a Vig; if I’m wrong and we have a Vig, I theorize that we seem to have one who is either uncooperative or unreceptive to town suggestions (hence the lack of attempt to confirm the doc claim). I only mentioned **special ed** as an example because, frankly, he’s one of the posters that I think would be most likely to completely ignore suggestions and target his own kills. How has the ig been uncooperative? It seems quite likely that they are taking out non-participants as a good Vig should if they have no solid leads. ---
**Author:** ![Scathach](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Scathach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scathach)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/744 "2011-12-14T20:00:10Z")
> [@choie](#): > > **Scathach** herself: hasn’t done much scumhunting, in fact doing more to protect **Svejkb** than to protect either herself or hunt out any other players. Which is why I lean toward options #3 (if she’s snuggling) or #4 (if she’s protecting either a regular scumbuddy or a scum power role whom she deems more “important” than herself). Just want to pop in and reply to this before I reread today, I’m \*\*not \*\* defending Svejk over myself, I’m questioning the motivation/logic behind some votes. Particularly Hirka’s. Which I do consider a form of scumhunting even if you don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Scathach](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Scathach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scathach)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/745 "2011-12-14T20:47:39Z")
Gnarlycharlies D2 > [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > i realized that later at Night. while i was catching up, i decided to vote because i thought the deadline was close. in the posts i was reading he still had 2 votes on him. i never did fully catch up so i missed the unvotes. i took a break and promptly fell asleep. ☹ > > what?! 😕 Self defence > [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > if that was complicated, i want to see what you think is simple. :rolleyes: Fluff. > [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > posting as i catch up. > there is a tendency to lynch the loud because they can be abrasive. others think it’s anti-town because it distracts from scumhunting. history has shown it’s not a consistent indicator of alignment. however, players who are consistently loud have been able to use it to their advantage especially as scum. > > his new playstyle gets to a lot of players, me included. he’s not as helpful as before and it’s hard get a read on him. > > **choie** , some players don’t say anything after a townie is lynched because players used to be suspected of [gloating](http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=JEEP's_Tells_for_Finding_Mafia) and so choose to say nothing. the tells in the link are dated and IMO obsolete. Helpful fluff. (also, if it’s hard to get a read on special ed, why is he so sure he’s scum?) > [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > at the last vote count i read, i saw you had no votes. my vote alone would not have lynched you. since i found **Special Ed** the next most suspicious and he had a vote, i voted for him as well. my ‘helping’ you is not intentional. it wouldn’t be the first time scum made a one-off vote on a fellow scum. > > for the record i voted. the list actually shows my vote but still lists me as having not voted. > > what’s wrong with Scat? it makes me think you’re a jazz singer unless you’re referring to a more ‘gritty’ meaning. Self defence. And fluff. > [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > traditionally, a doc prevents an attack. it’s actually contrary to the work of a RL doc who saves someone after an attack. Helpful fluff > [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > you’re obviously referring to D1. i don’t recall that my vote was making a four-way tie. i voted as i was catching up. at the time i saw that **Mahaloth** had two votes and a viable lynch candidate. > > no, i didn’t. i was composing before that vote count. i was again catching up as that’s the time i am able to get online for a fairly substantial amount of time. that’s after work for me since i live in Asia. i didn’t realize that i only had 11 minutes. i thought i had an hour more so others might consider **Special Ed**. Self defence > [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > it does seem too obvious a play for scum to make so i’ll say **Svejk** is leaning town. > > what bothers me is **Hirka** ’s vote on **Svejk**. i understand that lynching **Svejk** can give us answers but **Hirka** ’s reason is off. he’s willing to risk lynching a possible townie **Svejk** to prove he should be voting for **scathach** who he already suspects. > > **Mahaloth** and **Special Ed** will have to wait for now. > Vote Hirka Votes Hirka using a case that’s been made already. Maintains suspicion of special ed and Mahaloth without giving any more reasons or justification. A lot of it smacks to me as flying under the radar, not sticking his neck out type stuff. I’m aware that it’s quite like what made me wrongly think Inner was scum, but the fact remains that shying the limelight is often a scum tactic. I’m going to reread fubbleskag (who’s weird vote for septimus is still striking me as suspicious) and decide whether or not to move my vote. ---
**Author:** ![choie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/choie/32/7829_2.png) [@choie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choie)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/746 "2011-12-14T20:57:48Z")
> [@Mahaloth](#): > > I don’t think I’m reactionary or strange. I just think fubble made outrageous and false claims about me, with no citation, and it bothered me. It wasn’t “in game” claims, either, it was personal. And unprovoked. Are you sure about that? I’d definitely understand your getting upset if it brought up stuff from non-game issues, but I thought he was just addressing your playing style in this and other Mafia games. But honestly, maybe I wasn’t paying as much attention to that interaction as I should have. FWIW I thought he was just needling you, not full-out-machete-attacking you. It’s hard to tell with **fubbleskag** , I grant you, considering his, um, rather unorthodox use of smilies as communicative tool. 🙂 > [@Mahaloth](#): > > How have you down better as a scum hunter in this game? Dude, did you _see_ how sucky I was in **De’endee** , at least in the first half of the game? I think I’m doing better not that I’ve actually hit any scum (alas) but that I’m _trying_ to, and being more analytical than I was in my first game by this point in the procedings. Once **De’endee** hit about three weeks toward End Game I picked up considerably and I think I became an asset to town, rather than a liability… as God knows I had been. So that’s basically it. I’m just comparing what I’d been in my first game with how I’m behaving in this game. I’ve done as good a job as I could in analyzing the three outliers (those who’d been voted by known Townies) and while I was undeniably wrong about **Inner Stickler** , I don’t think my case was faulty. > [@Scathach](#): > > Just want to pop in and reply to this before I reread today, I’m \*\*not \*\* defending Svejk over myself, I’m questioning the motivation/logic behind some votes. Particularly Hirka’s. Which I do consider a form of scumhunting even if you don’t. I think you did _seem_ to be defending **Svejk** over yourself, though I’d be interested if any other players agree with this assessment. Now I do see that you’re looking more closely at **Hirka** , which is kinda difficult because he’s been one of the lowest participating folks in the game. > [@fubbleskag](#): > > previously explained (was so tempted to respond here only with a smiley of some kind lol) 🙂 (You knew it was coming…) > [@fubbleskag](#): > > that would be something, wouldn’t it Oooh, my more paranoid side would _love_ to see that as a non-denial denial, to quote _All the President’s Men_. [/QUOTE] Wow, apparently my post rated three smilies! That’s equivalent to one anti-bah from **special ed** , if I’m judging the exchange rate accurately. > [@special\_ed](#): > > I just don’t see the reasoning for the vote switch at that time if Svejk isn’t Scum. > > So I’m leaning that way. Ah, so you’re picking options #1 or #2 as the most likely ones? What are your impressions of **Scathach** , then? Which one of those two options do you think is likeliest of all? ---
**Author:** ![Scathach](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Scathach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scathach)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/747 "2011-12-14T21:14:08Z")
> [@Svejk\_1](#): > > Yup, I’ve tried, but it does not work for me ☹ On my phone (android, using Swype keyboard) long pressing any letter will bring up the various special characters associated with that letter. Including Š ---
**Author:** ![Scathach](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Scathach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scathach)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/748 "2011-12-14T21:17:47Z")
> [@fubbleskag](#): > > voted \*\*Septimus \*\*because it was my original vote, I hadn’t had time to review any of the other cases or build one of my own, and had already caught a boatload of shit from you lot for not voting; damned either way, it seems I’m not sure that anyone could believe voting for a claimed doc (whose claim you stated you believe) is less suspicious than not voting at all. But then, it’s almost too blatant to be scum.:smack: **unvote fubbleskag vote gnarlycharlie** I’m still a bit iffy on this one. ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/749 "2011-12-14T22:48:28Z")
> [@Silver\_Jan](#): > > I am still not sure what you are getting at but this may be what you want answered, **Svejk** said that he might unvote me if someone\*\* MORE\*\* suspicious comes along. For another person to be\*\* MORE\*\* suspicious, I must have been suspicious in the first place! **Svejk** placed a random vote, the end, then he said\*\* MORE\*\*, that’s why I mentioned semantics. Yo cannot have more of anything if you don’t have anything in the first place! I understood the semantics part, it was the “or does he know more that I do” part that just made absolutely no sense to me. It looks like a smudge, that he’s scum and knows you’re Town, but that makes no sense in the context - if he knew you were Town, why would he be more suspicious of you? Oh well. > [@Hirka\_T\_Bawa](#): > > Sure, would you mind linking to it? I even missed it, or forgot it if I saw it on my phone. Sure, Scathach had some issues [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14547001&postcount=557) and I had some criticism [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14547089&postcount=558). > [@Hirka\_T\_Bawa](#): > > As I mentioned above, my main reason for voting for **Svejk** is because I think he’ll give me more information then a lynch of **scathach**. **Svejk** ’s change of vote was more suspicious to me, and covers two possibilities to me: > > 1. He doesn’t want to be linked to a townie bandwagon lynch, and we all know the 2nd or 3rd votes are most suspicious on a townie lynch, so changed to be the last vote on another townie. Or… > > 2. He was trying to protect a scum mate who he thought was safe at first, then saw the change of votes, and wanted to protect his scum mate. > > Of course, there is always the 3rd option, he is Innocent, and his vote is as he says it is… While that is a possibility, to me, it is farther down the possibility lists then options 1 and 2. So, I voted for who I found scummiest so far. 1. He was the first vote on Scathach, she was in the lead with 4 votes, he unvoted her to put the 4th vote on InnerStickler, what you say makes no sense. 2. What do you mean here? He voted her to protect her because she was safe but then when the tide changed, he unvoted her to save her? 3. Do you really think 3 is the least possible of _these_ three options? > [@Svejk\_1](#): > > Poor **septimus**. Two votes and an anti-bah supporting one of the votes - and all that on his anniversary! I hope he gets to an internet cafe before EoD so he can reply to the charges against him. I want to consider them some more, but for now they do seem convincing to me. Svejk, could you tell me why you chose not to vote Septimus after finding my case convincing and voted Scathach instead? > [@fubbleskag](#): > > voted \*\*Septimus \*\*because it was my original vote, I hadn’t had time to review any of the other cases or build one of my own, and had already caught a boatload of shit from you lot for not voting; damned either way, it seems Would you have voted him if he’d claimed mason and was confirmed by another mason just because you didn’t have time? Do you remember this: > [@fubbleskag](#): > > I’m willing to believe your claim for the time being. ---
**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:** [December 14, 2011, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/750 "2011-12-14T23:00:47Z")
Day ends at 10:00 AM MST Friday, in 1 Day and 18 Hours. Vote Count: Svejk (2): Special Ed, Hirka T’Bawa Mahaloth (2): MentalGuy, fubbles fubbles (1): fluiddruid gnarliecharlie (1): Scathach Scathach (1): choie Hirka (1): GnarlyCharlie choie (1): Mahaloth ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/751 "2011-12-14T23:08:11Z")
> [@gnarlycharlie](#): > > what bothers me is **Hirka** ’s vote on **Svejk**. i understand that lynching **Svejk** can give us answers but **Hirka** ’s reason is off. he’s willing to risk lynching a possible townie **Svejk** to prove he should be voting for **scathach** who he already suspects. > > **Mahaloth** and **Special Ed** will have to wait for now. How does Hirka’s vote strike you as scummier than Special Ed’s? ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/752 "2011-12-14T23:12:51Z")
Oh, I think I may have misread that vote. ---
**Author:** ![Svejk\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea666f/32.png) [@Svejk\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Svejk_1)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2011, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/753 "2011-12-14T23:46:56Z")
> [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > Svejk, could you tell me why you chose not to vote Septimus after finding my case convincing and voted Scathach instead? What I said was that they seemed convincing to me for the moment, but that I wanted to consider them more. I was also hoping that \*\*Septimus \*\*might make it to an internet cafe and post. In any event, the case against Septimus that you made [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=14541176#post14541176) is basically that he is trying to lurk in plain sight. I agree that that was the case at the time, and that it looks scummy. Still, when I was reviewing \*\*Scathach’s \*\*case, I found what looked to be more ‘active’ evidence of scumminess - not just hiding but actually doing things that I thought were scummy, such as missing the vote, and casting a (to me) suspicious early vote. Another reason I did not want to join the vote for \*\*Septimus \*\*at that time is that I felt (and feel) that there was enough scumminess to go around. It was relatively early in the Day (36 hours to go) and I wanted to contribute a case that I thought and think was worth making, in order to point things out to people, shake things up, get a response out of **Scathach**. I was prepared to change my mind should better evidence come along. In fact, when I reported a post-count [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14543623&postcount=529), 26 hours before EOD, I actually state that “I actually find myself being more or less sympathetic towards all of these cases except for the one against **Guiri** ” - the other cases being **Scathach** , **Inner Stickler** , **Septimus** , and **Special Ed**. Of course, when **Septimus** declared 4 hours later, and the **Scathach** train started going around that time, what was once a case I wanted to make in addition to some other case in order to contribute to scum-hunting all of a sudden turned into a bandwagon and I got cold feet. ---
**Author:** ![fubbleskag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fubbleskag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fubbleskag)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2011, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/754 "2011-12-15T00:08:16Z")
> [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > Would you have voted him if he’d claimed mason and was confirmed by another mason just because you didn’t have time? Do you remember this: couldn’t honestly say - don’t believe I’ve run into masons yet. and yes, I remember saying that - why do you ask? ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2011, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/755 "2011-12-15T00:23:03Z")
> [@choie](#): > > Dude, did you _see_ how sucky I was in **De’endee** , at least in the first half of the game? I think I’m doing better not that I’ve actually hit any scum (alas) but that I’m _trying_ to, and being more analytical than I was in my first game by this point in the procedings. Once **De’endee** hit about three weeks toward End Game I picked up considerably and I think I became an asset to town, rather than a liability… as God knows I had been. You’ve had a few posts detailing how bad of a player you have been at the start of the game. Are you familiar with the term “Scum gloating?” ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2011, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/756 "2011-12-15T00:23:26Z")
You quoted my vote on Septimus and then voted him yourself without any comments. Septimus claimed doc. You unvoted, willing to believe his claim for the time being. No-one counter-claimed Septimus. You quoted my unvote where I asked Septimus about editing his PM, asked others to post the wording from their PMs, and re-voted Septimus. When questioned about your vote you said “it was my original vote, I hadn’t had time to review any of the other cases or build one of my own”. You didn’t mention that you thought he may have faked his PM. So, you’re saying that you agreed with my case, was willing to believe the claim and then changed your mind overnight as you’d nothing better to go on? ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2011, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/757 "2011-12-15T00:26:53Z")
> [@Svejk\_1](#): > > I was prepared to change my mind should better evidence come along. In fact, when I reported a post-count [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14543623&postcount=529), 26 hours before EOD, I actually state that “I actually find myself being more or less sympathetic towards all of these cases except for the one against **Guiri** ” - the other cases being **Scathach** , **Inner Stickler** , **Septimus** , and **Special Ed**. Through my experience, Scum usually want to leave their options open for voting. That way when they do vote they can go back and say, “Look I was suspicious of that person” Pretty much just what you are doing now. Also, if any of those players flip Scum, they can always point back and say, “I saw that on day 1 or Day 2!” ---
**Author:** ![special\_ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@special\_ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/special_ed)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/758 "2011-12-15T00:28:06Z")
> [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > You quoted my vote on Septimus and then voted him yourself without any comments. > > Septimus claimed doc. > > You unvoted, willing to believe his claim for the time being. > > No-one counter-claimed Septimus. > > You quoted my unvote where I asked Septimus about editing his PM, asked others to post the wording from their PMs, and re-voted Septimus. > > When questioned about your vote you said “it was my original vote, I hadn’t had time to review any of the other cases or build one of my own”. You didn’t mention that you thought he may have faked his PM. > > So, you’re saying that you agreed with my case, was willing to believe the claim and then changed your mind overnight as you’d nothing better to go on? This is rather damning. I hope you’re on my side, guiri. ---
**Author:** ![Svejk\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea666f/32.png) [@Svejk\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Svejk_1)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2011, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/759 "2011-12-15T00:52:55Z")
> [@special\_ed](#): > > Through my experience, Scum usually want to leave their options open for voting. That way when they do vote they can go back and say, “Look I was suspicious of that person” > > Pretty much just what you are doing now. > > Also, if any of those players flip Scum, they can always point back and say, “I saw that on day 1 or Day 2!” Meh. I realize that this is what scum do (or at least that this is what you said in the past they do) but I’m not going to pretend I have an iron-clad case and there’s no doubt in my mind, and at the same time act as though there’s no base to any other vote that is in play at that moment. There’s usually been different cases being made with varying levels of merit, and seeing as there’s still probably four or five scum in the game, it is quite possible that different people making different cases at the same time are on to something. If being open and up-front about the relative strength of my case as over against other cases makes me look scummy to some, then so be it, I’m not going to pretend I am more certain about what I am saying than I actually am. And neither should I, or anyone else. As it happens, in one of your responses to me, you state (as regards your case against me): “Now, is it an iron clad case? No, of course not. But it is highly suspicious” ([here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14551334&postcount=597)); and just now you seem to be agreeing with \*\*Guiri \*\*that \*\*Fubbleskag \*\*is pretty suspicious. How is that essentially different? ---
**Author:** ![fubbleskag](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fubbleskag](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fubbleskag)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2011, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526/760 "2011-12-15T01:08:09Z")
> [@GuiriEnEspana](#): > > So, you’re saying that you agreed with my case, was willing to believe the claim and then changed your mind overnight as you’d nothing better to go on? no, you’re saying that. I never said anywhere that I’d changed my mind at all. > [@special\_ed](#): > > This is rather damning. I hope you’re on my side, guiri. he is and you know he is [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526.md?page=37) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mafia-the-thrill-of-the-chase-newbie-friendly/603526.md?page=39)