Mafiascum.net

I suspected Morthas of buddying because he was silent for a long time and then went in on likeabauss shortly after I did, with considerably less justification. His military obligations cleared him because the main reason I thought he was buddying was due to a lowish amount of meaningful content, and obviously this was justified if he simply didn't have the time to build cases.

And... well, maybe you do give votes without reason in the start of the game. But it ain't exactly the start of the game anymore. Hell, that wouldn't have bugged me at all if it were actually RVS, I think, but when you've replaced into a game in progress there is already a bunch of content. Honestly, I'm sorry for coming down on you like that, I just didn't realize you were trying to make an RVS vote.

That aside, welcome to the game, and I look forward to seeing who you think is town or scum after a thorough reread. And I think we all would prefer to hear the reasons for your reads, if that's not too much trouble. Info helps the town, and newbies like us aren't always gonna be able to guess what you're thinking.

In post 88, sikon327 wrote:

sikon327 wrote:Why, exactly, do you "lack conviction?" Why is it that you believe that you don't have enough evidence to vote me? Statements like "it contradicts your goal of lynching a townie," "do you not like logical play," "do you feel threatened," "are you scum" do not sound like the rhetoric of someone who "isn't sure." What is it that you're afraid will happen if you vote me "prematurely"?

Why use rhetoric that centers around the idea that I am scum trying to lynch a townie if you aren't actually convinced that I'm scum?

I don't know why you feel these questions haven't been answered, except for the fact that I didn't specifically address some of my responses to you...

On lacking conviction for a vote:

In post 58, likeabauss wrote: ::OBSERVATIONS:: I'd like to see how those questions they raised are handled and discussed though...

Morthas - ::QUESTIONS:: I'm interested to hear an answer, if you'd be so kind.

I'm not afraid to vote for anybody. I'd prefer to explore as many angles as we can uncover during this day phase. There's no pressure to move quickly at this point, and we already have somebody at L-2 with several unanswered questions (more on this later in a separate post.)

Also, I'm confused... Rhetoric? Statements? You cut and copied from my post and tried to frame questions that I asked as if they were statements that I made. This is wicked scummy. You also didn't answer any of those questions. So... pot, kettle... what's up?

Regarding your argument about my meta, and refuting it:

In post 73, likeabauss wrote:I'm not one to dive too deeply into meta history as it can be changed by an experienced player, or maintained to illustrate consistency and pseudo alignment.

I don't put much stock into meta reads (I know lots of people here do though.) I just prefer to focus the discussion/energy elsewhere. You can dig into old games of all the players all you want. I don't think it matters much, for the reason I posted above. A good player can/will adjust their meta or maintain it as they see fit.

In post 96, sikon327 wrote: And likeabauss -- don't think I haven't noticed your sudden silence. You were online today, but didn't see fit to actually post. I would very much like you to answer the questions I've posed to you. If you are indeed pro-town, then you should be able to explain the pro-town justifications for your actions.

I do most of my posting during the work week. On the weekends, I have an ipad and read on my couch, but I hate typing on that thing and quoting and trying to formulate a proper response. I do work a couple weekend days a month, and may post if something pressing is going on and needs insight.

In post 83, fferyllt wrote: likeabauss, do you still play regularly on another site?

Nope. Those games are my most recently played. Been on hiatus for awhile.

In post 101, likeabauss wrote: I don't put much stock into meta reads (I know lots of people here do though.) I just prefer to focus the discussion/energy elsewhere. You can dig into old games of all the players all you want. I don't think it matters much, for the reason I posted above. A good player can/will adjust their meta or maintain it as they see fit.

On meta here is one thing i find to be true.

Only Ever Use Meta To Disprove A Scum Tell

Meaning don't use meta to make someone scummy, only use it to disprove someone being scummy.

Cause usually when you use meta to make scummy it ends up being wrong.

I will catch up on this game in a minute.

In post 47, likeabauss wrote:sikon327 - thanks for your detailed response to my initial prod. In response to your questions back to me, I'll vote either randomly during a RVS if we need to instigate discussion and create info (prior to my post, sufficient info was generated that I didn't see the need for a random vote alongside my questions.) Or I'll vote when I have more conviction (I have not done enough digging yet to support any of my theories, for or against you or any other player.) So, no vote thus far.

If I may, I'd like to explain the scum tendency of leaning town on multiple people... there are a number of reasons for this. Scum know who is town, therefore they can/will be correct when it suits them (ie, later they can point back and say "Hey, my read on that guy was town... now he's dead, I was right, I'm a good guy.") Also, they can build credibility with town members by leaning/suggesting that they are town... especially with some more novice players. Very often a town player will feel validated like they are doing good, when somebody else thinks they are town. (In my experience, it's more important to find scum than for other people to think you are town. Scum will often NK the most trusted town person to maintain control.) There are a thousand other scenarios, but these are just a few, and we are of course exploring all that we can on Day 1.

What are your thoughts on the formation of town blocs?

In post 64, Lynx_Shine wrote:This thing just happened to start the day I had to go to a company picnic, hence the confirm and disappear.

In post 31, Kueshina wrote:As for how to start day 1, depending on the setup:

massclaim

, some PRs claim to get doc/watcher protection but others say hidden, hypocopping, in dethy and similar everyone outs their reports, if there's a bulletproof the get told that they get shot, they claim if they got shot, if there's no bulletproof but

there's a doc and no kill, sometimes they tell everyone who they saved

, etc.

I might've missed something in that mess of formatting, but I'm locking in on the ones I bolded. Where are you getting that a massclaim would ever be a good idea for Town on Day 1? "Power roles all of you claim and hope we have Doc to protect you and scum aren't pulling false roles from the open chart." Why would the Doctor

ever

reveal just to say they saved somebody? They'll get killed now.

Also not sure why you claim ffery is buddying sikon after they had a brief argument/discussion over play preference. Above anything she's the IC and sikon doesn't have a little two-letter title, that sounds like the natural place to go to ask a meta question.

VOTE: Kueshina

In post 58, likeabauss wrote:I just want to point out that Kueshina and imkingdavid just demonstrated real scum hunting in their most recent posts. Thoughtful insights and additions to the conversation that warrant consideration and exploration.

Could you elaborate a bit more on Kue? Both of their answers came down to "it was just RVS", but while imking brings up a legitimate point, Kue is trying to find partners based on vote analysis before anything. My issue with this is "X and Y are partners" potentially lines up "well X wasn't actually scum, but maybe Y is so let's go for that lynch."

This may be a meta thing, so two wolves typically start a wagon or copy each others' votes so hard here?

In post 54, Kueshina wrote:the way Morthas copied sikon327's vote on likeabauss makes me wonder if Morthas and sikon723 are scumpartners, although it also seems possible that likeabauss and sikon723 are scumpartners distancing themselves.

He's not even consistent on whether scum partners buddy or create distance in the same sentence.

Where did you go?

In post 68, cAPSLOCK wrote:

In post 65, JasonWazza wrote:
You just earned yourself a fucking rage post and you will see why

NO ONE IS HERE 24/7

SOME PEOPLE CAN'T POST CONTENT EVERY 5-6 HOURS

SOME PEOPLE CAN ONLY POST CONTENT EVERY 24 HOURS.

Now i will give you time stamps on my end of when my last 2 posts before this were posted

FOR FUCKS SAKE DON'T EXPECT ME TO POST WHILE I'M FUCKING SLEEPING.

Wow you are overly touchy. Not to mention dead wrong. I never complained about your posting frequency or timing. I never had any problem with you sleeping. I just pointed out you had added exactly zero to the conversation. I stand by that claim. Glad to see you up and at em now though. Welcome to the game.

Now that you are taking part it seems you are here to defend likeabauss. (Along with continue to ride my tail)

You have history with him? Or are you two somehow related in THIS game.

By the way... Lay off the caps lock. I find it personally insulting.

As per way of my learning I take it personal attacks (rage poasts lol) and profanity are acceptable here?

Responding to the bolded, over the top personal attacks and direct insults are frowned upon and in extreme cases can lead to being force-replaced from games or modkilled. Profanity is acceptable.

The newbie games tend to be a little less fractious that games in other areas, but mafia by nature is a an adversarial game and provoking reactions is a way to develop reads.

In post 94, TheTrollie wrote:jason n' caps are town

VOTE: kueshina

Why do you think caps is town?

for 81, 85, and 97

In post 107, TheTrollie wrote:for 81, 85, and 97

Agree on 85 and 97. I may be too much a part of the topic to judge re 81.

You said you have a slight gut read of scum on sikon. My early impressions were the opposite, and my more recent impressions are basically oh god wallz. I'll get past that and read sikon more carefully sometime today.

the whole football metaphor in 81 screams town

I had 81 and 85 confused. 85 is the one I can't really judge.

oh, no way scum would risk talking about reads from an IC post. He'd stray clear away from that if he had any doubts about its legitimacy.

In post 103, fferyllt wrote: What are your thoughts on the formation of town blocs?

What do you mean forming a town bloc?
Also, who do you suspect as scum? I'd love to hear your insights/thoughts/questions into this game, instead of the analysis of the way it is being/has been played. Seems like you're a very meta focused player, is that true?

Lynx_Shine - A wise mafia man I once knew said "When in doubt, hang the lurkers." Mostly because their actions are not pro-town (they are either lurking intentionally as scum, or not helping the town by way of not contributing, so TL;DR HANG THEM.) How would you feel about us stringing you up for failing to help the town?

cAPSLOCK - How can you take offense to somebody replying to you in all caps, when your handle is cAPSLOCK? Seems like flattery more than yelling if you ask me. What is your read on fferyllt's IC post that you mentioned? Mine says scum. Tell me the reason for your read and I'll tell you mine?

Kueshina - This may be a bit unconventional, but would you place yourself in the "older than 25" or "younger than 25" age group?

TheTrollie - I thought the guy playing your role before you was pretty scummy. Have you reread the thread in more detail like you were saying? If yes, please to be sharing some knowledge so that we can either hang you for being scum or move you to the Probably Townie list.

Also...

In post 98, TheTrollie wrote:

I was willing to write it off for the time being because he had stated that he had military obligations that would make it difficult for him to post often or with very much content, and also, I wanted to focus on my investigation of likeabauss.

how does this clear him from buddying

This. Stinks. It's like a reverse psychology, future defense plant. "Yo guys, I'm not scum. If I was, I would've never said anything like I did in post 98. Hang WHOEVERELSE, scuzzy scum, my spidey senses are tingling."

In post 112, likeabauss wrote:This. Stinks. It's like a reverse psychology, future defense plant. "Yo guys, I'm not scum. If I was, I would've never said anything like I did in post 98. Hang WHOEVERELSE, scuzzy scum, my spidey senses are tingling."

wut? pls explain

In post 112, likeabauss wrote:
cAPSLOCK - How can you take offense to somebody replying to you in all caps, when your handle is cAPSLOCK? Seems like flattery more than yelling if you ask me.

The all caps thing was mostly humor. I've been a net denizen since pre-hypertext days. And the all caps thing is annoying under almost all circumstances. This was one of them. Beyond that I was somewhat taken aback by the heat of JasonWazza's flaming after I probed with an accusation of general contentlessness. In honesty, I think he was right in pointing out there had been little time for content. My poke at him was a noobish way to attack, and also react to this aggression against me. But his tone was so crazily negative off the bat it has stunned me somewhat since. I have been trying to adjust to see how games are played here and what is normal in the discourse.

In the end JasonWazza's defensiveness gives me a mild scum tingle. But it's not much yet.

In post 112, likeabauss wrote:
What is your read on fferyllt's IC post that you mentioned? Mine says scum. Tell me the reason for your read and I'll tell you mine?

Gladly. And the main reason I didn't jump right on it was I was seriously curious if it was bad form to mention a read from her in that mode. Since I have seen no clear answer to that I will carry on as if it is not.

In post 84, fferyllt wrote:

IC Intro

All of our roles were assigned randomly, so my chances of being town or scum were exactly the same as yours.

First of all. Unless she is somewhat obsessive I do not see any reason to be so clear here. It sounds a lot like "I am here to help you in spite of the fact that I . No really. don't be mad at the end... and know I will be fair as an IC anyway."

Then later:

In post 84, fferyllt wrote:

IC Intro

I am playing for my team to win, though, so please treat me with the same skepticism in my non-IC posting that you treat everyone else.

Another nod towards awareness that she is not necessarily town. But why? Why admonish us not once but TWICE to remember that she is our advocate at the site in spite of the fact she may not be in the game.

She doth protest too much. It's really that simple.

And I asked her if this was boiler plate to the end of understanding if it had context in this game. A google search for these exact wordsturns up this: No results found for "All of our roles were assigned randomly".

I asked

Is that IC post personal boilerplate? Is it bad that I got a read from it? am I not allowed to do that?

and she responded:

Yeah, it's personal, though I looked at a few IC posts by others in thinking about what to include. Some IC's put in a lot of do this don't do that in theirs, but it doesn't look like this is a crowd that needs to be warned not to self-hammer or hammer someone without a chance to role-claim.

Since this is her first IC I think she just wrote it. It is not boiler plate yet... and I bet we see it change in the future. The fact she did not address the direct question of whether or not I am allowed to get (and discuss) a read from it makes me even more suspicious.

FWIW I am grateful for the fact the site does this in the newbie area and I feel a little bad for getting such a strong scum read from it.

In post 112, likeabauss wrote:What do you mean forming a town bloc?

It's the upside of town reads - some town players finding each other and actively working together to develop reads and push bandwagons.

Also, who do you suspect as scum? I'd love to hear your insights/thoughts/questions into this game, instead of the analysis of the way it is being/has been played. Seems like you're a very meta focused player, is that true?

I'm still developing my reads. I have you down as possible scum, but I'm worried that it could be a false positive due to your current play style/rustiness after a few years away from mafia.

I need more data from a few players.

I'm not sure about "very" meta focused, at least at MS. When I have experiential meta I use it. When I wind up with a leaning scum read based on in-thread play I like do a meta dive and look for reasons to rethink.

In post 114, cAPSLOCK wrote:Since this is her first IC I think she just wrote it. It is not boiler plate yet... and I bet we see it change in the future. The fact she did not address the direct question of whether or not I am allowed to get (and discuss) a read from it makes me even more suspicious.

heh.

It will definitely change, since I can be a first time IC only once.

I decided to ignore that comment, since what I wrote is close to what I see in other IC intros, regardless of the ICs' alignment. But there's no reason for you not to discuss what you picked up and see if other players agree.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my concerns in a clear, direct fashion, likeabauss. With regards to the concerns you raised:

The majority of the questions in the post, unless I am grievously mistaken, were rhetorical questions, the answers to them, if I were to take them strictly literally, would be:
No, I am not trying to lynch a townie. I believed that my question had been misunderstood, and was restating it in what I felt was a more clear fashion. I was confused as to why you mentioned RVS, because I was never referring to RVS.
Yes, I do like logical play, but again, I was under the impression (and perhaps I was mistaken!) that my question had been misinterpreted at least somewhat. And,
No, I am not scum.

As for the meta dive, well, it's hard to quantify my "usual" level of involvement in a mafia, as this is my first game. I chose to look at your meta because:
-JasonWazza mentioned that your lack of voting was probably a "playstyle tell," and I assumed that if it were part of your playstyle, it would appear in your previous games. Obviously this was fallacious, as your previous games were somewhat outdated, a fact which I failed to notice. And I'm sorry for that.
-fferyllt specifically mentioned doing a "meta dive," and I decided I wanted to try my hand at that.

I do not feel particularly threatened, because, well, there aren't any votes on me at the moment.

I guess this line of questioning is kinda dead. I'm backin' off for now.

UNVOTE: likeabauss

Now, let's have a look at how the thread has progressed while I was on my little crusade here. Here are my reads on everyone:

fferyllt wrote:(...) my more recent impressions (of sikon327) are basically oh god wallz.

...And I will try to keep it short and sweet.

:

You're all sick of hearing me talk about likeabauss. For what it's worth though, I still don't 100% trust him. .

:

Not seeing much in the way of meaningful content. Getting antsy about that. / .

:

Second verse, same as the first. But it's not quite as extreme as the first verse. Seems to be making a more definite effort to me. / .

:

There's a wagon on Kue right now so I'm going to go a bit more in-depth here.

Kue was my first townread, you all remember, and my biggest for a while. I'm... less sure now, but all in all, their behaviour seems more careless than malicious in those instances where they have behaved oddly.

Their insistence on justifying their idea of the 1st day massclaim, the one big thing everyone's losing their shit over, seems less like a scummy suggestion and more a misguided attempt to defend something they said that's honestly best left behind. They've stated that in spite of all the talk about it, they do believe it would be appropriate for this game. They've also all but claimed 1SBP, which seems like something scum wouldn't do, especially not completely unbidden.

Ain't joining that wagon unless something else comes up. .

:

I'm sure you could've found something to comment on. Or maybe there's a bit more to comment on now? .

:

Has posted exactly twice. Impossible to determine if she's lurking or simply has limited web access because she's opted to hide her online status. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if she ended up replacing out. .

:

Aggressive, sure, but seems well-meaning. Doesn't post often, but makes it count when he does. Leaning .

:

Morthas, like I said before, had hints of buddying, but it was difficult to say considering he had little opportunity to post.

His replacement is very... taciturn. Still don't much trust him, but he hasn't been here very long. / .

I'm gonna have to think about where to place my vote for a bit.

sikon, I disagree with you about Morthas. I got strong town vibes from his early posts and I'm feeling good about his replacement.

cAPSLOCK is another player I'm feeling good about. Trollie's observations were close to mine, though I intentionally set post 85 aside. I think I'm seeing some genuine town paranoia in his recent posts (especially that last one), which has outweighed a feeling from his earlier posts that there was excuse-making/set up for lurking going on.

That's fair. And... reading over my reads, they're kind of inconsistent with what I'm actually saying about them at points. Did 'em by ear. So if I may amend them...
likeabauss is Null / Slightly Scum, rather than Slightly Scum.

imkingdavid is Null / Slightly Scum, rather than Null.

I... still don't know about Morthas/Trollie. His posts... don't ring town to me. Then again, I guess I can't honestly say they ring scum either. I guess I shouldn't claim a scumread on him just yet. Trollie's Null.

ooo! i love guessing games!

In post 119, sikon327 wrote:I... still don't know about Morthas/Trollie. His posts... don't ring town to me. Then again, I guess I can't honestly say they ring scum either. I guess I shouldn't claim a scumread on him just yet. Trollie's Null.

In post 120, TheTrollie wrote:

Spoiler:

I'm town

Lol.

The game I've played are more primitive than here. But I actually weight this type of thing as a mild flag when it is done very early in the game under no pressure. I tend to watch more closely in this case.

I'm curious to see what some of you more experienced players do with it.

In post 93, TheTrollie wrote:yo kuesh...

u scum bro?

No.

In post 112, likeabauss wrote: [...]
Kueshina - This may be a bit unconventional, but would you place yourself in the "older than 25" or "younger than 25" age group?
[...]

I believe the word you were looking for is "rude". Anyway, I prefer to avoid giving out private information on the internet to strangers in public fora.

In post 117, sikon327 wrote:[...]

Kueshina

:
[...] They've also all but claimed 1SBP, which seems like something scum wouldn't do, especially not completely unbidden.
[...]

That's not true at all. If you're referring to my question about how the 1SBP role works, that was just because I'd just mentioned an Epicmafia strategy that depends on the bulletproof role working the way it does there and it occurred to me to wonder if it worked the same way here.

In post 121, cAPSLOCK wrote:

In post 120, TheTrollie wrote:

Spoiler:

I'm town

Lol.

The game I've played are more primitive than here. But I actually weight this type of thing as a mild flag when it is done very early in the game under no pressure. I tend to watch more closely in this case.

I'm curious to see what some of you more experienced players do with it.

From what I've seen at MS, I consider it p much null.

A player I sometimes hydra with here occasionally claims scum in his first post. :/

In post 122, Kueshina wrote:

In post 112, likeabauss wrote: [...]
Kueshina - This may be a bit unconventional, but would you place yourself in the "older than 25" or "younger than 25" age group?
[...]

I believe the word you were looking for is "rude". Anyway, I prefer to avoid giving out private information on the internet to strangers in public fora.

Alright, perfectly fair. Allow me to cut to the chase then... I was really just wondering why your logic sucks. What gives? Sikon used the word "careless", I'm going with failed logic.