Alex made posts that defended Sparks without appearing to defend Sparks, which fits my profile of Cassidy. I'm talking about posts like this one:
1) I'm wary of leaning too heavily into a 'take out the usual suspects first' approach. If we get into a hit-list mindset and start looking like we're forming a consensus on who to vote in what order, I suspect that if any are town, both scum pairs are liable to try to stir up FUD about them and let them get voted out, while they save their shots for players that look less likely to draw PoE votes.
This would have been a good post for Cassidy to make at this (early) point in the game. It doesn't mention Sparks by name, doesn't tie the poster to him, it sounds towny -- but it implicitly argues against voting out Sparks.
However, when Alex elaborated on that point, he made it sound like he wasn't even talking about D1:
2) Using D1 for that, I can understand - it's setting up a kill list and running with it for the next couple of days that's the problem.
I don't think Cassidy would pull back that quickly, if his early post was strategic. Alex could easily have said "even on D1, a policy vote is lazy." Some players did say that. That would be the direction to go if you wanted to keep soft-defending Sparks.
But, then he had this post, which others have quoted:
3) Probably an unpopular opinion, but I can't really get behind the Sparks push myself. He's come up as a candidate for pretty much the same reasons in the last couple of games and it didn't do us any favours in either - it ended the game in EastEnders and didn't get us anywhere in Nightless. He strikes me as playing similarly now to how he did then, and my gut feeling is that if he were on one of the scum teams, his partner would be pushing him to play safe and look like less of a target - I can't see how leaving him exposed to get hit for quite some time now could benefit a scum-mate. As it is, I think he's more likely to be low-hanging fruit than scum right now.
This would be a great post for Cassidy, because it defends Sparks while simultaneously talking about why Sparks's partner would be unlikely to defend him.
Then, in the end despite his arguments against policy votes, Alex essentially made a policy vote:
4) VOTE: EC I understand that there's not a great deal to work with on D1 and that can be demotivating, but it's not as though there's been nothing at all to discuss here. As things are, I still can't really tie much at all to EC beyond some thoughts on Natiko, whereas I've been able to note down more from everyone else. To me, that feels like a potential attempt at hiding in plain sight, so I'd rather vote there.
This vote criticizes EC for not giving thoughts, which is essentially EC's style, same as Sparks's erratic posting is his. "Not giving thoughts" is not a mafia quality -- mafia are fully capable of faking thoughts.
Conclusion: Alex doesn't exactly fit my profile of Cassidy, but he's the closest. In accordance with my goal from earlier today, I'm going to put my vote on him and see where it takes us.