Tales of Mafia XXXI - Super Fun Game Thread

[[M] Al - Biker Dad]

Even though there has been a slight boost in activity since last I checked in, it's still abnormally quiet for the second half of the second day. It makes one ponder the possibilities. Who has their own schemes up their sleeve that they aren't sharing with the rest of us? How many of you could potentially be Mafia, and simply chattering amongst yourselves in the shadows? Hm.

With the ever-increasing complications our skits are revealing, it's difficult to say for certain whom I most want in the noose. I am still suspicious of Raven and Colette, but I'll let those lines of questioning drop for the time being since they're based more on my (almost always correct) gut instinct than solid leads. Colette seems more willing to engage now, and Raven, I admit, is more than likely just an enthusiastic fool. I have perhaps a few more queries tumbling around, but until someone dies or something else profoundly important happens, we're stuck with just that: baseless queries unsupported by concrete evidence and unfit for experimentation at present. In other words, the enemy of the scientific mind. I would almost be tempted to use my skit right now, but I feel we ought not to blow them all away right out of the gate.

So that leaves the question of... Mikleo. A few of you have pointed fingers at him thus far, and I can't say I disagree with your reasoning, much as I would love to file it away as bandwagon voting by a small crowd of paranoid animals. His pattern of popping into discussions without saying anything of use is setting off some alarms, but really, I simply lack other targets. It's frustrating to be two days into this charade and have only the faintest ideas of who could be guilty. So in the interest of pursuing my only real lead and getting this moving along to a potentially more interesting progress point:

##Vote: Mikleo

Feel free to make yourself known and try to convince me to spare you, young man. Otherwise, I'll be smiling in the crowd as you're dragged up to the noose.

This post 100% makes me feel uneasy.

If you lack "other targets" then go find some. If you only have the faintest idea of who could be guilty, try to make your picture clearer.

- The most Raven has done for much of the game is make claims and outlandish assumptions which are so far removed from what is actually possible and likely that he's contributed little of substance. Anyone can see that. Throwing out theories which make no sense and aren't even possible, let alone likely, isn't helpful.

1. How do you know some of his theories aren't possible?

2. The "little of substance" he's contributed is far more than you have.

- I wasn't non-existant day one. I participated and shared my thoughts as much as several other people did. Sorry if it wasn't enough participation for you since some of us work for a living but considering we had nothing to go on day one analysis was limited from everyone so claiming I contributed less than anyone else when no one had anything real to grab hold of is a flat out lie.

Yes, you were non-existent on Day 1.

The only thing noteworthy of your D1 performance was a vote for Anise, which was withdrawn and not applied to anyone else in the game.

This strikes me as overly defensive.

- I've actually analyzed more than you have. I've come out and said my reads on Raven and on you outright and I tied it to the actual behaviour that makes me suspicious of you both. I'm actually scum hunting and backing up my opinions directly. You presented a list of some actions for everyone, then proceeded to mostly say you think four people are town without ever actually tying your analysis to anything they did or that you recapped directly with the possible exception of Elize, but even scum would have a hard time downplaying their analysis of the role list. If all your going on is gut feelings then fill your boots friend but you never actually justified your reads in any way by explaining your thought process. I'm not a mind reader so when I see someone say "these people read town to me" and leave it at that, that's not analysis. Any notions running through your head about them were not shared in any meaningful detail and don't try to pretend otherwise.

No, you haven't.

I've provided town reads on 4 players, a scumread on 1 player, a full summary list, with conclusions drawn from said summary. You've got 2 scumreads, and you're dead wrong about at least one of them. Congrats.

- unlike you, my own analysis and explanation of who I suspect and the detailed reasons why is obviously pro town. I want to share my thoughts and have them out there so others can read them, think on them, and offer critique or alternate takes on what I'm thinking. You have not opened up your opinions to such criticisms and that's pretty clearly anti-town behaviour.

How have I not opened up my opinions to criticism?

Had you ever in any way referenced the actions listed in your summary when explaining your town reads I'd probably agree with you. Instead you have a post of actions and a post for your reads with nothing to connect them.

That's because the list is independent from my own reads. My reads are based off of the context of the specific posts. The summary is more for my own personal use to try and pinpoint anything noteworthy.

When you don't use it to actually justify your reads? Yeah, pretty scummy. Not gonna lie.

No, it's not scummy. Not gonna lie.

I'm honestly content to let myself get lynched just to prove Colette wrong. But that wouldn't be a good town move, since I don't know whether her extremely defensive posts are townie or scummy.

On the one hand you could say she's scum for being overly defensive at the slightest bit of pressure, but the fact that she's trying to apply pressure is indicative of town.

So far, my read of Colette is in the grey-area. There are bigger targets that I'd like to lynch right now.