Sorry, he did something magical. I thought I said that, but I look up and see that I didn’t.
I decided that finding scum early in the game is more important than finding alignment, at this point. Considering how close we are to LYLO, alignment may never come into play at all, while we have got to lynch scum, like, now so that Good doesn’t lose. Catching scum doing something or watching them and catching them in a lie seemed like a much better use of my Turn.
OK, less than 24 hours to go, No lynch is not an option, so time to start getting this game rolling. I’m going to start off with:
Vote Hockey Monkey
I will admit right off the top that the following evidence is not monumental, but it’s more than I have on anyone else, so I’m going with it. The first thing is somewhat hard to quantify, but I feel like her posting has been “careful”: just enough to stay active, not so much to garner attention. This applies to both quantity and content of posts. I don’t know if this will work, but here is a link to a search of all of her posts in this thread. Judge for yourself.
Related to this are her votes toDay. Both votes are votes for “slips” by sachertorte and hawkeyeop. These are absolutely the easiest votes to justify as scum - when I’ve played scum I loved when Townies made these kinds of statements. [Note - I’m not saying sach or Hawkeye are Town - that was not a slip!! :D]. I remember playing a game with **Santo Rugger **- I was scum, he was town - where he said something like “people don’t need to justify their votes.” It was like manna from heaven, and so easy to pounce on. I get the same feeling here - these kind of “slips” are soooo easy for scum to jump on.
I also went back to look at the alleged slips. sach’s does in fact look like a slip, although not necessarily a scum slip, and he admits as much. I think the Hawkeye slip come from this post. The full text is: “It is still townies using a kill that might not be necessary. If Zuma is town, I don’t want to the scum’s work for them.” The context is regarding the choice between Disintegrating both Blam and zuma, or disintegrating only one and letting Boozahol use his backstab try on the other. Boozahol, and later Hockey, interpreted Hawk’s statement as saying that Boozahol is Town, but I’m not sure that’s what he meant. He had been advocating only one Disintegration all along, so the “townies” in that quote reads like he was referring to Town in general, not Boozahol in particular. This is reinforced by the plural tense. YMMV on that, but it’s certainly not a cut-and-dried slip, and that’s the *only thing *she’s basing her vote for Hawkeye on.
In that same vote post, she also tried to smudge sach with his failed investigation. When she was schooled on this reasoning by MHaye, she did not retract or respond in any substantive way (although she seems to understand that she was wrong in this post.) There has been no attempt to follow up on these suspicions or build a more complete case.
In short, Hockey Monkey is behaving like I behaved when I was scum, and that’s enough to put her at the top of my list.
Hockey also hasn’t updated her case since Hawkeyeop’s mistaken use of his powers has been acknowledged and explained, has she? Imho the way that went down exonerates Hawk a bit.
I think the only real justification for curing me is that people are treating me as semi-confirmed town, not because of my role. The absence of a counter-claim to my claim of being Cursed seems to be the primary evidence in favor of this. Doing so would effectively put the scum one nightkill behind. The downsides to curing me have already been listed by sach but it’s up the clerics. I am not sure who to vote for, I hope I’ve got something later. The setup is throwing my already awful scumdar for a loop.
It is certainly possible for the scum to not curse anyone and have one of their members claim being cursed in order to waste the cure and “confirm” said player as pro-town. I don’t think it is the case for you given the lack of a push to get you cured, but we shouldn’t dismiss the possibility in the future.
Scum don’t have to push for an Evil player to be cured. The Curse is only 5/6 effective. Evil could skip cursing someone, have an Evil person claim cursed, then pretend to have won the 1/6 chance of surviving the curse. If they get a cure tossed at them, that would be just gravy, but they don’t need a cure for such a plan to work. No need means no pressure.
Hmmm… PM away.
oog and tongue-in-cheek, this totally strikes me as an Gore-invented-the-interwebs statement. Though it could just be my crappy memory too. 
There’s also that, but then the town might lynch them anyway because a 1/6 shot is reasonably unlikely, well - at least I would doubt it.
The Mafia Virgin post had zero to do with me feeling I was wrong. I’m standing behind both of my votes for now.
I’m starting to think we’ll still be missing implications of the ruleset long after the game is over.
If Evil has to provide a curse target, it seems a counter-balance to us not being able to no-lynch, right?
Maybe they are only able to opt out of a curse if the right racial distribution is present, as Pleo clarified in the no-lynch question.
To further clarify, I am in the process of evaluating and re-evaluating as the day progresses. For now means just that.
Rules Clarification:
The Evil do not have to Curse anyone.
The Cursing mechanism: each Evil character votes (on their secret board) who they’d like to curse. I randomly choose one of the character’s vote to decide who is Cursed. (This is because the Evil characters are not necessarily the same alignment, and so might disagree who to Curse.) The Cursed character and the Evil characters are informed.
In terms of game design, the required Disintegration and not-required Curse serve two purposes: 1) balance out the less than 100% certainty of an unblocked scum-kill, and 2) give the Evil characters a chance to false-claim being Cursed.
Yeah, but people are generally kind of reluctant to lynch based on that… a few games ago I claimed to be a second Scotsman and it saved me for a shockingly long time.
I certainly hope so. It would greatly simplify my life. tdpatriots seems to have PM’ed Pleonast on this point as “will” has an entirely different meaning than “may.”
OT:
In my very first Mafia game I had a surprising lesson in how long people will buy completely absurd claims given the game is complicated enough.
/shakes fist at MHaye
//loads Boomstick
NETA: I should have shaken my fist towards rysto lol
Btw. I’m a guy 
Man, this game is moving fast. There really isn’t a lot to go by since yesterday. I tried to analyze the votes yesterday to find out if anyone was excessively happy with two dead people. I didn’t really find much of anything.
Storyteller was beginning to ping me, but given that he apparently has handed the Helm off to a likely townie, it’s gone again.
Zsofia: Seems to be flying under the radar - not taking risks. Suggested no-lynch.
Hockey Monkey: I don’t like the sachertorte vote, but at the same time feel it would be risky for scum to vote that considering how much heat sinjin and I are facing for doing it on day one.
hawkeye: I find it a pretty weird choice of both target and power. Why examine for items instead of watch a character? Finally, “X has 1 item” is a pretty same claim to make for scum.
It’s not exactly DNA evidence, but I really can’t find better. I don’t think a no lynch is a good idea, as it only gives scum a “get out of voting free”-card, and giving a them a curse more before we can kill scum. Sure, there is information to be had, but scum might as well just take the extra kill and not try to steal anything or do anything else conspicious. Question remains whether this was just a bad idea, or a real act of scumminess.
My votes are:
vote hawkeye
vote zsofia
A lot of you have voiced concerns about me not breadcrumbing or claiming actions. I will reconsider this tomorrow after another investigation attempt.
Cookies is really pinging me here. It might be meta-gamey but usually she is one of the coolest* of mafia players. Her anger at being asked what her action was this past Turn seems way over the top. She’s a Doc and it would be expected that she protected either herself or someone else. Why not just say that in the first place. Why be so coy about it?
I’m also confused by her antagonism towards the CG’s in the game. I thought we were going to try and all be on the same side.
**vote Cookies
**
I am still concerned about those who have said nothing about what they did this turn including the keeper of the list ShadowFacts.
sinijn: Did you just claim chaotic?