Mafiascum.net

NOTE TO SELF: later in game when i get paranoid and suspect evryone else, REFER TO POST 98.

In post 85, wgeurts wrote:

In post 79, lucca261 wrote:

In post 22, Revan wrote:!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is my first game where mafia has daytalk, so this is going to be interesting.

UNVOTE:

Already don't like this. It's scummy. Revan just says: hey, look at me, posting facts about this game and contribuiting nothing. other people did this, but his pinged me the wrong way.

A few others have done this, thoughts?

How scummy would you say it is on aa scale of 1-10?

In post 97, wgeurts wrote:Lucca, in what way am I not doing what you say magna is doing? Big analysis trying to look pro-town?

Quoting these to make it easy to respond to.

In post 51, Revan wrote:Magma how much experience to you have with mafia?

Why is this question relevant for you? Why did you ask this?

In post 54, wgeurts wrote:Magna, care to explain what you dislike about my post? I'm leaning town on you right now. My reads list goes from most town on top to most scum at the bottom. As off now all reads are weak, and will likely change.

{wgeurts}
{magna, UD}
{Hawk}
{Doom, FC}

Hawk's explanation is feasible, although I may not agree with the way he approaches things it now makes sense somewhat. Going to have to see some action on his end before putting him as town though. FC's vote is dodgy, reinforced by the fact he is also newish. I would like some explanation first before making a final judgement though.

How do you compare Sesq vote with FC? They did the same thing. What is your current read on both of them?

Also, what did you see by despair that made you put him on the top part of your reads?

In post 59, MagnaofIllusion wrote:

In post 57, Sesq wrote:Anyway, since I think it's ""officially"" day 1 i'll reconfirm vote on VOTE: doomfeathers

...Why no reasoning behind this revote?...

not quoting it all since it would look like a clusterfuck.

but this is another solid post by Magna. he seems to be consistent, and the overanalysing style seems to be a playstyle thing. like him pointing out Sesq clinging at the wagon, just like Friend did and he pointed it out.

In post 65, Revan wrote:

In post 56, wgeurts wrote:

In post 51, Revan wrote:Magma how much experience to you have with mafia?

What are your thoughts on the game?

Woah, hold your horses. I need some time to analyze my brother.

...still waiting...look at that fluff...

In post 74, doomfeathers wrote:Eh, never mind. On second ISO, he doesn't look so scummy. I still disagree with avoiding content and judgments early on, though.

UNVOTE: Hawk

What was your issue with Hawk at the first time? I looked at the posted where you voted him and it's all passive agressive responses, based on nothing.

In post 43, Hawk wrote: Dooms reactions to our posts have been interesting to say the least. I don't like them for the most part. He doesn't engage back with Magna or wgeurts instead chooses to explain his reasoning further when it really seems kinda bleh. The whole "Oi look at me being town and not understand the mechanics thing" is possible. Im more firmly in the idea that he could be scum because his accusation that were out of RVS and FoS on me. I also think that tells me his reaction might be slightly panic'd as he attempts to point attention elsewhere since he seems to think these votes are all out of RVS


So I'm fine placing my vote here for now.

VOTE: Doom

Wgeurts right here? Posts back? I revoted him as a reaction test. He's throwing FoS around and votes like it's candy making very soft attempts at reasoning and in general being non committal.

Lucca says this same thing in another way if you don't like the way I said it.

Why spread the votes Doom? Instead of just compounding the pressure on friendly since he already has one vote. That makes more sense if you're looking for pressure.

pedit: Lots of posts happened mostly reads it looks like from wgeurts. God your username is hard. Do you have a nickname you like?

In post 17, Ultimate Despair wrote:

In post 14, doomfeathers wrote:I'm a little confused about the mechanics. How do the Mafia kill more than two people with no night phase and only two daykills?

Hey, everyone. I'm doomfeathers and I'm here to remind you that as a member of the town, I don't know anything about the way scum operates in this setup and therefore need to ask a question to everyone so you all know how ignorant of the mafia inner mechanisms I am.

Scum ping for the LAMIST.

- Junko

This is about as town as one can get pre-game Lucca.

Hawk, call me yoghurt, gogurt, or TheLegend27

In post 92, lucca261 wrote:So you're voting Wguerts, then fosing Hawk, both for weird and made-up reasons on the same post. That makes me feel you're trying to throw shit at the wall and see what sticks. Don't like this. I feel that's what newbie scum would do on this situation, without a night kill.

I admit my reasoning was bad, but it wasn't intentional. Are you trying to criticize me for hunting more than one scum at once?

Also @Lucca: My reason was that I thought Hawk was trying to pick an irrelevant argument to clog up the thread. Like I said, it's something I read about in a wiki article.

@Hawk: I don't like to wagon people just because they aren't posting much unless they continue not to post content after receiving one vote. A lynch isn't the intention. Besides, this way we get two birds with two stones.

I think Lucca townleans. His posts don't seem to have scum motivation or give me bad gut feelings.

wgeurts wrote:Hawk, call me yoghurt, gogurt, or TheLegend27

Please, not that ad.

In post 100, mozamis wrote:NOTE TO SELF: later in game when i get paranoid and suspect evryone else, REFER TO POST 98.

This is either town-indicative or LAMIST, and I'm not sure which.

Doom, mind linking the wiki article?

What does LAMIST mean? I've not seen this new hip term.

LAMIST means "Look at me, I'm so town."

In post 77, doomfeathers wrote:VOTE: Sesq

Sesq has posted five times, but has neither generated content nor voted seriously. She seems to be coasting. Friend Computer has done the same.

Revan has done the same. Other players like Super have only posted once. Why you decided to specifically point out Sesq?

In post 81, Hawk wrote:

In post 80, doomfeathers wrote:I thought about what somebody (I think it was wgeurts) said about your play being NAI, and it made sense, so I don't have good reason to scumread you anymore. Voting for inactive players to produce more content is common practice. Also, you were already voting for me.

Fair enough I suppose.

Also I know that why do you think I put the vote again?

Also why Sesq and not Friendly then? What about Sesq's few inactive posts tickles your fancy more than Friendlys?

Don't like this from Hawk right here. What did you want to gain for the answer? What doom could answer that would impact his alignment?

In post 85, wgeurts wrote:

In post 79, lucca261 wrote:

In post 22, Revan wrote:!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is my first game where mafia has daytalk, so this is going to be interesting.

UNVOTE:

Already don't like this. It's scummy. Revan just says: hey, look at me, posting facts about this game and contribuiting nothing. other people did this, but his pinged me the wrong way.

A few others have done this, thoughts?

How scummy would you say it is on aa scale of 1-10?

His post felt unnatural. Speculating about the daytalk mafia. Felt like he was trying to just fill his post, cause he didn't want to just post a vote or something.

Not that scummy. It was the first page, and it's quite difficult to create a serious read from that post. Like a 3 on the scale.

In post 93, mozamis wrote:

In post 57, Sesq wrote:Anyway, since I think it's ""officially"" day 1 i'll reconfirm vote on VOTE: doomfeathers

This worries me a bit.
It could be scum using the non day 1 start as an excuse to jump on the doom wagon.
First vote worthy thing I've seen (yes, Hawk, Doom, Wguerts are all town.)

VOTE SESQ

What is your opinion on Friend doing the same?

In post 97, wgeurts wrote:Lucca, in what way am I not doing what you say magna is doing? Big analysis trying to look pro-town?

Your first post, calling I think Despair's post scummy was okay. We didn't have a lot to work about, and your post seemed to express that. You knew that we had nothing to work, and was trying to find the tiniest straw that could mean that someone is scum.

Instead of Magna doing that, he found the tiniest straw and speculated on it in a way that seemed like: "Hey, I'm certain that this is scum. Look at me analysing this, trying to scumhunt"

I think that now this is more his playstyle than scummy, but it was something interesting to look after, specially on the second pages.

In post 98, mozamis wrote:Ok so Magna, Wgeurts, Hawk, Doom prob town.
Lucca just sloghtly less so, but looks town.
Anyone else could be scum.

So everyone that posted content is town, and the rest of the posters are scum?

In post 107, doomfeathers wrote:LAMIST

Ok so I'm an old fart - so go easy - but what is LAMIST? (like the mist that scum weave over the thread, Kuribo style?)

In post 104, wgeurts wrote:

In post 17, Ultimate Despair wrote:

In post 14, doomfeathers wrote:I'm a little confused about the mechanics. How do the Mafia kill more than two people with no night phase and only two daykills?

Hey, everyone. I'm doomfeathers and I'm here to remind you that as a member of the town, I don't know anything about the way scum operates in this setup and therefore need to ask a question to everyone so you all know how ignorant of the mafia inner mechanisms I am.

Scum ping for the LAMIST.

- Junko

This is about as town as one can get pre-game Lucca.

Hum. I can see this coming from both alignments, depending on how experienced "Junko" is.

"Hey, I will do something scummy.

wait it's not scummy because I'm myself pointing it out."

In post 111, lucca261 wrote:So everyone that posted content is town, and the rest of the posters are scum?

ON DAY ONE ITS A GOOD PROVISIONAL YARDSTICK.
the probabilities of any of those guys being scum just isnt worth the bother day 1.

In post 108, wgeurts wrote:Doom, mind linking the wiki article?

Umbrage's Guide on How to Win Scum Games wrote:Be as distracting as possible. While people will complain if you make too many wall posts, almost nobody complains if you take up several pages with a silly one-on-one argument that nobody else cares about. This can be done with a buddy or your primary suspect. Use confusing pronouns whenever possible to increase uncertainty, and never let a single point drop. Argue your stance back and forth, getting more obscure each time. If you make reference to an earlier post, state the number but do not give a link. Nobody will admit that they can't follow the argument, they will find it difficult to concentrate both on reading you and pushing their own agenda, and best of all, they can't call you out on anything because you're just a loyal townie doing his best to catch scum.

In post 106, doomfeathers wrote:

In post 92, lucca261 wrote:So you're voting Wguerts, then fosing Hawk, both for weird and made-up reasons on the same post. That makes me feel you're trying to throw shit at the wall and see what sticks. Don't like this. I feel that's what newbie scum would do on this situation, without a night kill.

I admit my reasoning was bad, but it wasn't intentional. Are you trying to criticize me for hunting more than one scum at once?

Also @Lucca: My reason was that I thought Hawk was trying to pick an irrelevant argument to clog up the thread. Like I said, it's something I read about in a wiki article.

@Hawk: I don't like to wagon people just because they aren't posting much unless they continue not to post content after receiving one vote. A lynch isn't the intention. Besides, this way we get two birds with two stones.

I think Lucca townleans. His posts don't seem to have scum motivation or give me bad gut feelings.

wgeurts wrote:Hawk, call me yoghurt, gogurt, or TheLegend27

Please, not that ad.

I'm critcising you for voting wguerts, and on the same post, fosing Hawk.

The way you posted it seemed like you were more interested on voting Hawk than Wguerts, but voted Wguerts for some unknown reason.

In post 106, doomfeathers wrote:Please, not that ad.

"What are you guys playing?"
"I’m supposed to be playing MafiaScum™ but this one player keeps kicking my ass.
"Is it TheLegend27?!"
"Yeah, TheLegend27."
"Who is the legend 27?"

"Some say TheLegend27 is the first MafiaScum™ player ever. Born from fire."
"I heard, TheLegend27 can deathtunnel a man harder than Titus."
"I heard TheLegend27 once defeated an entire scum-team with a single vig-shot."
"But the worst part is, just when you think you’ve neutralised him, just when you think you might not have to bite the rope… WHAM!!! Vengeful kills the remains scum!"
*collective gasps*
*Iphone Notification*
"What? No, no no no, no no no!"
*Iphone Notification*
"That’s impossible! “TheLegend27” has created a town bloc!"
"And is lynching our Godfather!"
"Aw you guys, I’m sure it’s not that bad."
"You have no idea what just happened."
"I might have some idea."
*wgeurts turns around, and powers his device’s screen, showing he is in fact TheLegend27*

Lucca my first post on Us was fundementally flawed.

UD*

In post 110, doomfeathers wrote:LAMIST means "Look at me, I'm so town."

I never realized that was an acronym.... I always assumed it meant lame as in the most lame or lamist...

Anyway

VOTE: Sesq

unofficial VC I think is L-3 here.

Let's get some content Sesq.

Pedit: Lucca I mostly asked Doom those things because I wanted reactions and responses. Content created right now to questions like this doesn't really give me anything towards his Alignment right now but I might be able to understand his goals or thoughts behind his reasoning asking questions like this and looking back at them. Not all early game is played for the present but the future.

I have been misspelling wgeurts since the start. Definitely a difficult username.

Funny how I was so happy I was on page 4, but then there's a page 5.

Sorry for the fluff, needed a breather. Later, will post my initial reads.

For now:

VOTE: Revan

Would like to see more content.

In post 115, doomfeathers wrote:

In post 108, wgeurts wrote:Doom, mind linking the wiki article?

Umbrage's Guide on How to Win Scum Games wrote:Be as distracting as possible. While people will complain if you make too many wall posts, almost nobody complains if you take up several pages with a silly one-on-one argument that nobody else cares about. This can be done with a buddy or your primary suspect. Use confusing pronouns whenever possible to increase uncertainty, and never let a single point drop. Argue your stance back and forth, getting more obscure each time. If you make reference to an earlier post, state the number but do not give a link. Nobody will admit that they can't follow the argument, they will find it difficult to concentrate both on reading you and pushing their own agenda, and best of all, they can't call you out on anything because you're just a loyal townie doing his best to catch scum.

Gah, would have been so much easier had you not been able to link one implying you were lying.

In post 118, wgeurts wrote:Lucca my first post on Us was fundementally flawed.

Not saying that it's a good argument, or that he did something scummy or no.

I'm saying that your thought process when making this post is different than Magna was. Your was more natural for me.

In post 111, lucca261 wrote:

In post 77, doomfeathers wrote:VOTE: Sesq

Sesq has posted five times, but has neither generated content nor voted seriously. She seems to be coasting. Friend Computer has done the same.

Revan has done the same. Other players like Super have only posted once. Why you decided to specifically point out Sesq?

Revan was already being interrogated. Players who have posted only once I would rather not try to deal with; they don't tend to respond very quickly, and are more likely to be complete lurkers.

lucca261 wrote:I'm critcising you for voting wguerts, and on the same post, fosing Hawk.

The way you posted it seemed like you were more interested on voting Hawk than Wguerts, but voted Wguerts for some unknown reason.

I voted wgeurts because he seemed to be focused on figuring out best play for scum rather than for town. I figured he was doing so in order to give the impression that he must be town because no scum would be so blatant. I have since retracted my vote since his reasons for the discussion were explained.