# Screamers Mafia **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [September 21, 2009, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938 "2009-09-21T13:16:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 56
**Author:** ![DaphneBlack](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/daphneblack/32/5389_2.png) [@DaphneBlack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DaphneBlack)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1101 "2009-10-09T11:53:23Z")
**Guiri** , how is no. 2 there a ‘slip’? ---
**Author:** ![GuiriEnEspana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bc79bd/32.png) [@GuiriEnEspana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuiriEnEspana)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1102 "2009-10-09T11:58:39Z")
> [@DaphneBlack](#): > > **Guiri** , how is no. 2 there a ‘slip’? I understood your first post as stating that it would be great if a scum leader managed to do something scummy and then your second post clarified that you meant that it would great for Town (to find them), not great for scum (to do something scummy as leader). I thought the fact that you needed to clarify meant that you also felt that the first post gave rise to a double interpretation - a slip on your part. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1103 "2009-10-09T12:37:42Z")
> [@DaphneBlack](#): > > [egotistical post] > > **Drain Bead** , what do you think about the development of your bandwagon? You may have said something about it today but I don’t see it right now. I haven’t really had time for intense scrutiny of the previous Day yet, because my husband is out of town and I’m doing the single mom thing with an 8-month-old who picked this week to go on her first ever sleep strike. The one thing that bothered me the most about it then was the fact that it started based on a couple of people saying that I had some sort of problem with personally claiming my alignment. This was never the case, and was something I probably could have averted simply by claiming that I was Town-aligned in the first post I made on the subject, because by the time I got back to the thread, I already had a couple of votes on me for not claiming when I clearly said in the post that I thought everyone should claim for claiming to have any worth at all. But really, we’ve gone over that. My issue now is with anyone who _continued_ to spout that bit of misinformation after I corrected it. Right now I can only recall **Normal Phase** doing it, but there may be others, and once I get some time (probably Sunday or Monday) that’ll be one of the things I look at. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1104 "2009-10-09T12:38:22Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > OK, **Boozahol** and I simulposted before. I see now that he’s confirmed that he did get something from **Gryff** , which I think is a strong point in favor of **Gryff** ’s claim. I would like **Boozahol** to confirm, though, that the object was something which could plausibly have come from a townsfolk, as opposed to a homicidal robot (I assume he’d say so if it weren’t, but I just want to be sure here). > > **peeker** , I don’t think that I buy that a Scum would want a Doctor to counter-claim. If you were Scum and someone did counter-claim you, we’d probably end up believing the other person over you (since you were already under suspicion) and lynch you (probably instead of an innocent townsfolk), after which the Scum would, at worst, kill the now-revealed real Doctor (probably instead of a vanilla). So we’re looking at a tradeoff of something like (Scum - Townie) versus (Doctor - vanilla), a trade that, to me, looks pretty strongly to favor Town, not Scum. And it gets even worse when you consider that the Doctor wouldn’t have to counter-claim right away. Really, I can’t see why Scum would want to be counter-claimed, but rather just the reverse. Yeah, I agree with this analysis. [bpeeker\*\* was trying NOT to provoke a counterclaim, but that in no way implies that **peeker** is innocent.` > [@](#): > > Or look at it another way: Supposedly, you discouraged a counter-claim because you thought it would be so bad for Scum to find out who a doctor was, right? And yet, that’s exactly what they did find out, if your claim was honest. How is that pro-Town? This on the other hand, I don’t agree with – if we take **peeker** at face value, then he wasn’t sure he’d be around to defend himself later in the Day and made the claim for that reason. In that light, his wording and subsequent justifications are consistent with pro-Town play: he wanted to make sure he didn’t drag other doctors (if any) down with him. The thing I’m currently having the most difficulty with as regards peeker’s claim is the continuing lack of so much as a role name to associate with it. Why would it even occur to him there might be other doctors? This a decent-size game, but two full-fledged Town doctors would still be a long-shot, I think. At a few times **peeker** seems to imply he’s drawn that conclusion based on something in his PM – why did he never just come out and say what that information is? I wouldn’t expect the fine print, if it mentions things like whether or not he can protect himself, or if there are other restrictions or benefits, but surely there’s something he could have used to support his claim, and the implications thereof. He was in danger of lynching, not trying to explain mysterious Mod actions; to me, that’s reason to be just a little bit more on the forthcoming side, if he’s Town. But I also think it’s too late for him now on that front – if he’s Scum, he and his teammates have had plenty of time to cook up something plausible. All that said, right now I do not think **peeker** is Scum. If he is Scum, then **Jimmy** deliberately promoted his bandwagon _and_ helped to discredit the only currently competing one, which is incredibly risky behavior. It would only make sense if **Jimmy** was 100% willing to have the day end with a dead **peeker** in exchange for Town cred, and that’s a rare thing for Scum to do in my experience, for obvious reasons. (Regarding the comments **CIAS** pulled out, I think they demonstrate insincerity on **Jimmy** ’s part regarding his assessment of **peeker** , but they don’t support the argument that **Jimmy** was actively trying to get **peeker** dead for Town cred, which I think is the only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from current evidence, if they are both Scum.) ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1105 "2009-10-09T12:45:31Z")
Remaining agnostic on **DaphneBlack** ’s bandwagon jumping for the moment (much snipped): > [@amrussell](#): > > … > **Peeker** : Tom Scud, Jimmy Chitwood, Gryff, [del]Nanook[/del] Guiri, Thing Fish, Oredigger, _Boozahol_, _Cold Phoenix_ > > … > > Interestingly, Jimmy appears on two bandwagons,… > [@amrussell](#): > > … Jimmy never actually votes peeker,… Huh? Those posts were only a few minutes apart! ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1106 "2009-10-09T12:47:18Z")
> [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > All that said, right now I do not think **peeker** is Scum. If he is Scum, then **Jimmy** deliberately promoted his bandwagon _and_ helped to discredit the only currently competing one, which is incredibly risky behavior. It would only make sense if **Jimmy** was 100% willing to have the day end with a dead **peeker** in exchange for Town cred, and that’s a rare thing for Scum to do in my experience, for obvious reasons. And here I’ll use your argument against me. Imagine the scenario in which **Jimmy** , as Scum Investigator, is trying to get valuable Townie cred. He’ll claim Cop later, of course, if it comes down to it, but really he’s trying his damnedest to stay around until endgame. **peeker** , a scum goon with no powers, gets in trouble with some others early in the game, and it looks like it’s possible he’s going down. **Jimmy** promotes his bandwagon, and the Scum agree that he claims Doc to live a bit longer if possible. If we don’t buy it, he turns up Scum and **Jimmy** looks great. If he doesn’t, they can either lynch me or try to turn the bandwagon elsewhere and see if they can expose some power roles instead of just killing a vanilla. It’s a risky gambit, but it has the potential to pay dividends. I once got bussed on a Day One by fellow scum Blaster Master, and IIRC the cred he got from leading the charge kept him alive until endgame. ---
**Author:** ![Drain\_Bead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e47774/32.png) [@Drain\_Bead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drain_Bead)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1107 "2009-10-09T12:48:39Z")
NETA: Keep in mind that this post was purely playing Devil’s Advocate on my part–I’m still torn on what to think of **peeker** personally. ---
**Author:** ![CatInASuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3be4f8/32.png) [@CatInASuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CatInASuit)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 1:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1108 "2009-10-09T13:03:25Z")
> [@amrussell](#): > > **Peeker** : Tom Scud, Jimmy Chitwood, Gryff, [del]Nanook[/del] Guiri, Thing Fish, Oredigger, _Boozahol_, _Cold Phoenix_ > **Drain Bead** : amrussell, Normal Phase, Alka Seltzer, DaphneBlack, Freudian Slit, Cold Phoenix, tiltawhirl, USCDiver, _CatInASuit_ > **jpei** : OAoW, TexCat, Alka Seltzer, DaphneBlack, Guiri, Tom Scud, _Freudian Slit_, _AllWalker_ > **Bill MC** : Jimmy Chitwood, Drain Bead, tiltawhirl, Alka Seltzer, Daphne Black, Allwalker, Texcat, jpei > > Interestingly, Jimmy appears on two bandwagons, but does so in an early position. Whatever the motivations for that might have been, it’s difficult to characterise it as bandwagon voting - you can’t tell, as you place the first or second vote on someone, whether the case will bandwagon or fizzle out. > [@amrussell](#): > > Jimmy never actually votes peeker, but goes out of his way to push the case against him. Now, this could be an attempt to earn town-cred down the line if peeker showed up scum, but I’m more inclined to think he was stirring the pot, and keeping the conversation on the wrong place. Ok, I have made a few mistakes with data, but this is in two simultaneous posts. Jimmy Chitwood voted for peekercpa in #348. You have it in your first post. In your second post, you state that JC never voted for peekercpa. **amrussel** , perhaps you explain the discrepency? ---
**Author:** ![CatInASuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3be4f8/32.png) [@CatInASuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CatInASuit)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1109 "2009-10-09T13:12:48Z")
NETA: not simultaneous, consecutive. Duh! ---
**Author:** ![Stanislaus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stanislaus/32/3391_2.png) [@Stanislaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stanislaus)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1110 "2009-10-09T13:25:31Z")
[QUOTE=CIAS] Ok, I have made a few mistakes with data, but this is in two simultaneous posts. Jimmy Chitwood voted for peekercpa in #348. You have it in your first post. In your second post, you state that JC never voted for peekercpa. amrussel, perhaps you explain the discrepency? [/QUOTE] To clarify - I should have said, _after the doc claim_, Jimmy never actually votes peeker etc. Before the claim, votes for peeker rested on their own merits. Afterwards, the issue was complicated by the risk of voting for a Doc. Some hardy souls put their money where their mouth was - by contrast, Jimmy made a lot of noise about how terribly scummy he found peeker, but wouldn’t commit to a vote. (He had unvoted promptly after the doc claim, like a good townie.) That’s what made it look to me like he was trying to keep the focus on peeker but without actually exposing himself. (Daphne, this should answer your question - because of what I think Jimmy was trying to do, I’m increasingly convinced that peeker is town. Even beforehand, I thought a claim was a lot more likely from a true Doc than a scum.) ---
**Author:** ![CatInASuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/3be4f8/32.png) [@CatInASuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CatInASuit)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1111 "2009-10-09T13:37:02Z")
Would anyone like to comment on the following set of posts that occured in game. Jimmy Chitwood: #654: **To be very clear, though, I think that his claim is a lie.** referring to peekercpa. #738: Comment about jpei’s use of power. Also asks for someone to look at BillMC #746: Questions whether jpei’s power would be scum or town, whether it was good play or scum play #776: fluff #809: says last 12 hours of gameplay has been anti-town #825, #830, #833: fluff Boozahol Squid, P.I. #839: **Peeker should protect himself tonight, if he’s a pro-town Doc. Similarly, any Vig out there should attack him** #875: Says the following: For what it’s worth,\*\* I don’t think it’s a good idea to try to give peeker a witch trial by vig. Whether or not the vig is successful doesn’t turn on whether or not he’s scum; it turns on whether or not he’s a doctor with the ability to self-protect.\*\* Jimmy’s next post following Squid’s call for peeker to be vigged is that it should not happen because peekercpa may not be able to defend himself. It has gone from saying he is a total liar to don’t attack him. Two possible options\*, knowing JC is scum: peekercpa is a doctor, but then why would JC not want a Vig to attack him? It wastes a night for the Vig when the Vig is not hitting a fellow scum and may even take a Doc out if he cannot self protect. Apart from confirming peekercpa as a Doctor to the Vig alone, because as we have seen he survived the Night. peekercpa is scum, then JC is protecting a fellow scum as he cannot protect from a Vig. \*all assuming a Vig exists. Anyone else have any comment on this because to me it looks like JC trying to cover for peekercpa. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1112 "2009-10-09T13:54:55Z")
(much snipped again) > [@DaphneBlack](#): > > I remain unconvinced by peeker’s supposedly huge scumminess. I do think he has not been very pro-town – in particular the timing of his claim, and I am increasingly wondering why he’s not giving a name – but a lot of what seems to be the case against him does not make sense to me (namely the business about ‘a’ doctor – I do not see the scumminess in that). I realise that staking out this position is me ‘defending’ him, and I also realise that I could be dead wrong here. Peeker’s a bold and confrontational player, and he might be just the sort of scum who would make this play. But I think that lynching him would be a mistake at this point in the game. The only thing more suspicious than defending a player who later turns out to be Scum is never taking any risky stances at all. In any case I don’t think **peeker** is Scum either, so we can be in that handbasket together. > [@](#): > > **CatInASuit** has noted that Jimmy was smudging me and **AlkaSeltzer**. I think it is a good scum tactic to try to get people to look at ‘bandwaggoners’ as scummy, as he seemed to be doing. When I played scum, I was desperate to avoid being on bandwagons – and this is what ultimately exposed me. In my experience, late-edition bandwaggoners are most often townies without good reads. Most often, because most players are Townies. And sure, some Scum players will avoid such situations like the plague (as you say you’ve done), but many won’t. Scum have to park their votes somewhere, and bandwagons are tempting precisely because they give so little information for the Town to use – sure, any given bandwagon is likely to contain a few Scum in inconspicuous spots, but which ones? * * * @ Guiri – I don’t classify what you pointed out as a “slip”. I don’t believe I have ever, anywhere, in a couple of years of playing this game, seen a Scum player betray themselves by an unfortunate piece of wording that would seem to suggest they would be happy with a Scum-friendly outcome. And yet time and again, Town and Scum alike seize on these things as evidence of something or other. I don’t get it. * * * > [@Drain\_Bead](#): > > I haven’t really had time for intense scrutiny of the previous Day yet, because my husband is out of town and I’m doing the single mom thing with an 8-month-old who picked this week to go on her first ever sleep strike. Since I’m going to be confrontational in what follows, let me add some sugar here — Awww! I have a two (almost three) year old myself. I can so sympathize. 8 months is the WORST for sleep. Poor little bug (and poor you). > [@](#): > > The one thing that bothered me the most about it then was the fact that it started based on a couple of people saying that I had some sort of problem with personally claiming my alignment. Actually if I remember correctly, **amrussel** ’s major beef was the seeming contradiction in your attitude as regards **OAOW** and **Chronos** , with the alignment thing tacked on more as an afterthought, or second data point. In my case (I actually cross-posted with him (her?), though the votes were some time apart), I was objecting only to the alignment thing, with your vote on **Chronos** (but not any contradiction regarding **OAOW** ) as support. Our cases on you had some commonalities, but were focused on different things. > [@](#): > > This was never the case, and was something I probably could have averted simply by claiming that I was Town-aligned in the first post I made on the subject, If you had done that, I would not have voted you. Objecting to **Chronos’** suggestion or **Chronos** himself is one thing – several people did that yesterday. Omitting an alignment claim while you do it, appearing to strongly discourage anyone else from following his suggestion, and further discrediting him by voting for him all in the same post – that’s why I voted you. What I see as disingenuousness and borderline bullying in your subsequent posts is why my vote stayed there, until there was no longer any point. > [@](#): > > because by the time I got back to the thread, I already had a couple of votes on me for not claiming when I clearly said in the post that I thought everyone should claim for claiming to have any worth at all. This is exactly what I mean by disingenuousness. You did say exactly that, but you consistently refuse to acknowledge the context and implications of your post taken as a whole. It is that entire _gestalt_ I voted for; it is that entire _gestalt_ I continue to find suspicious – even absent **Jimmy** discouraging people from voting for you, which he did do – and you have never really addressed that. All you do is continue to insist that you meant only what your words literally said (ignoring the context to the extent of snipping it entirely out of the one response post I pointed out), then used that insistence as a bludgeon to attack anyone who does not believe your explanation, as if it should be self-evident proof of your innocence. As you do again below. It’s getting old. > [@](#): > > But really, we’ve gone over that. My issue now is with anyone who _continued_ to spout that bit of misinformation after I corrected it. Right now I can only recall **Normal Phase** doing it, but there may be others, and once I get some time (probably Sunday or Monday) that’ll be one of the things I look at. Yippee. For what it’s worth, I have a WOW planned on you, too; and like you will probably not be able to get it posted until Monday. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1113 "2009-10-09T14:04:28Z")
> [@CatInASuit](#): > > Two possible options\*, knowing JC is scum: > > peekercpa is a doctor, but then why would JC not want a Vig to attack him? It wastes a night for the Vig when the Vig is not hitting a fellow scum and may even take a Doc out if he cannot self protect. Apart from confirming peekercpa as a Doctor to the Vig alone, because as we have seen he survived the Night. As you mention, this WOULD have gone some distance towards confirming peeker as a doc (though not necessarily a town one); also, if there was a compulsory vig, he or she would be more likely to hit town than scum on night 1; Jimmy wouldn’t necessarily want to discourage that. > [@](#): > > peekercpa is scum, then JC is protecting a fellow scum as he cannot protect from a Vig. this is possible. Also, getting into the argument helped maintain his cover as an engaged, analytical Townie. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1114 "2009-10-09T14:08:28Z")
> [@Drain\_Bead](#): > > And here I’ll use your argument against me. Imagine the scenario in which **Jimmy** , as Scum Investigator, is trying to get valuable Townie cred. He’ll claim Cop later, of course, if it comes down to it, but really he’s trying his damnedest to stay around until endgame. **peeker** , a scum goon with no powers, gets in trouble with some others early in the game, and it looks like it’s possible he’s going down. **Jimmy** promotes his bandwagon, and the Scum agree that he claims Doc to live a bit longer if possible. If we don’t buy it, he turns up Scum and **Jimmy** looks great. If he doesn’t, they can either lynch me or try to turn the bandwagon elsewhere and see if they can expose some power roles instead of just killing a vanilla. > > It’s a risky gambit, but it has the potential to pay dividends. I once got bussed on a Day One by fellow scum Blaster Master, and IIRC the cred he got from leading the charge kept him alive until endgame. I was going to post something along these lines. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1115 "2009-10-09T14:08:30Z")
> [@Drain\_Bead](#): > > And here I’ll use your argument against me. Imagine the scenario in which **Jimmy** , as Scum Investigator, is trying to get valuable Townie cred. He’ll claim Cop later, of course, if it comes down to it, but really he’s trying his damnedest to stay around until endgame. **peeker** , a scum goon with no powers, gets in trouble with some others early in the game, and it looks like it’s possible he’s going down. **Jimmy** promotes his bandwagon, and the Scum agree that he claims Doc to live a bit longer if possible. If we don’t buy it, he turns up Scum and **Jimmy** looks great. If he doesn’t, they can either lynch me or try to turn the bandwagon elsewhere and see if they can expose some power roles instead of just killing a vanilla. > > It’s a risky gambit, but it has the potential to pay dividends. I once got bussed on a Day One by fellow scum Blaster Master, and IIRC the cred he got from leading the charge kept him alive until endgame. Yeah, I know it’s a possibility, but it’s not at all a common thing to do, and two things speak against your supposition. The first is that at the time **Jimmy** voted for **peeker** , for all the noise he had attracted, he had only one vote, and that one a mere retaliation vote from **Tom Scud**. **Jimmy** started promoting his bandwagon at a time when he was in zero danger. This is why I said previously that if this _was_ a Scum-on-Scum bussing, it must have been a 100% effort to get **peeker** dead from the outset. It can’t have been done as a reaction to any in-game circumstance, because at that point, there wasn’t anything to react to. In this context, the doctor claim makes no sense. If they’re trying to bus **peeker** _as strategy_, as must have been the case if it was a bussing at all, then they have no reason to encourage **peeker** to claim doctor. Let him not claim! Let him claim harmless vanilla – that’ll surely garner a few more votes. (Sorry, must laugh here.) Why claim something that’s guaranteed to get a few people – including **Jimmy** , as it turned out, OFF his bandwagon? Where does **Jimmy** ’s town cred go now? It makes no sense. It can’t have been deliberate Scum strategy from the outset. And yet it must have been, if the timing of **Jimmy’s** vote against **peeker** is to make any sense at all. I think **peeker** is Town. ---
**Author:** ![Normal\_Phase](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Normal\_Phase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Normal_Phase)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1116 "2009-10-09T14:10:15Z")
NETA: Or third party. Not Scum, at any rate. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1117 "2009-10-09T14:21:09Z")
> [@Normal\_Phase](#): > > Yeah, I know it’s a possibility, but it’s not at all a common thing to do, and two things speak against your supposition. The first is that at the time **Jimmy** voted for **peeker** , for all the noise he had attracted, he had only one vote, and that one a mere retaliation vote from **Tom Scud**. **Jimmy** started promoting his bandwagon at a time when he was in zero danger. However, **Jimmy** , being a perceptive sort, might have noticed these three posts: > [@TexCat](#): > > Other things mildly pinging me at the moment are **peeker** ’s dogged pursuit of TomScud on what looks like pretty shaky grounds > [@Chronos](#): > > I know this is **peeker** I’m talking about here, but that seems like a really weird thing to attack. > FoS **peekercpa** > [@AllWalker](#): > > **peeker** , every game someone points out the balance rule … It’s the sort of thing that shows up every Mafia game - why is it worthy of a vote? There was definitely reason to think at the time he voted that there was a wagon about to start rolling. ---
**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:** [October 9, 2009, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1118 "2009-10-09T14:25:01Z")
Let it be known that Scuba\_Ben has subbed in for ColdPhoenix. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1119 "2009-10-09T14:37:54Z")
Okay, I’m going to give a high-level summary of Jimmy’s day, speculating for possible motives for his actions. In addition to the specific motives mentioned below, he was also trying to look like a good townie; anything he said could also simply have been an attempt to build generic town cred. Major themes: 1 - gave the peeker wagon a good shove. Continued to needle peeker after his claim (including being the first to point out the “multiple docs” implication), but argued at Night that he shouldn’t be vigged. Possible motives: a - hey look, free lynch! And if I can get a doc lynched without actually voting for him, bonus! b - scumfight. Jimmy gets townie cred if peeker ultimately flips scum; in the meantime the doc claim probably buys peeker a couple days at least. 2 - Derailed the Drain Bead wagon. Motives: a - get a townie on his side. Much townie cred if DB flips town eventually. b - save the scum! 3 - Started the BillMC wagon. Minor themes: 1 - snuggled me outrageously. Even hung a lampshade on it once. “peeker will kill me for talking to you so much” 2 - Opposed an OaOW claim. Poked at Chronos for pushing for a claim; also smudged Oredigger for asking for a full claim. Poss. scum motives: a - OaOW is scum. b - As he is scum investigator, figured he could investigate and find out anyway; if OaOW is miller, could keep him around for a later mislynch. 3 - gave my Oredigger investigation an early shove without voting for it. Scum motive: a - Oredigger is town. 4 - Poked at and smudged Chronos throughout the day. scum motive: a - Chronos is town. b - setting up later scumfight? (I don’t buy this – too low-key – but I think DB mentioned it as a possibility) 5 - Seemed to indicate that he thought the votes on Boozy were bogus. (“So many layers of anti-town in the last 12 hours”.) But without really committing. This was also a part of his anti-Chronos campaign. Also started the BillMC wagon rolling in response to a vote on Boozy. scum motive: Boozy is scum 6 - That thing CIAS pointed out earlier, about finger-pointing at the Drain Bead and BillMC bandwagonners. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2009, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938/1120 "2009-10-09T14:39:00Z")
Welcome, Scuba! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938.md?page=55) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/screamers-mafia/510938.md?page=57)