Mafiascum.net

Boop

In post 998, Dwlee99 wrote:How tho. You don't have 7 votes

i am patience itself

In post 887, Wiki wrote:

In post 882, Salsabil Faria wrote:

Listen towns, you want to eliminate me, np! But for the greater good, we should policy

Wiki

today.

UNVOTE: GE
VOTE: Wiki

Bye bye
U decided to die instead of scum Ico, i see no problems even if you are just green idiot

Oh my god you are cringe

In post 916, T3 wrote:

In post 630, Gamma Emerald wrote:I'm getting pretty tired of this shade from wiki despite him apparently not SRing me anymore

yeah but in general that type of moonlogic comes from town

like i think wiki is severely misguided town atp
still catching up though, rl happened and i haven't gotten a chance to post when i normally would today

I agree Wiki is town but having people that I trust but don’t trust me feels not great

In post 943, T3 wrote:

In post 760, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 726, Wiki wrote:Dwlee, Datisi, Ico? If so, gamma easily can be a scum for huge mistakes

Yeah you’re fucking off-base if you seriously think read accuracy is a good way to read people in general

bad tone, esp in the context

i do think i remember scumreading gamma one game for out of context bad tone and i was dead wrong
gonna try to find it later

LN 235

In post 986, Wiki wrote:

In post 985, Dwlee99 wrote:

In post 983, Wiki wrote:or you are just a noob

Dwlee99 wrote:I have over a hundred games on this site alone dude

this sounds very bad for you lol

Says the “professional mafia player” claiming a daycop guilty in a normal
PUH-LEASE

In post 1005, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 986, Wiki wrote:

In post 985, Dwlee99 wrote:

In post 983, Wiki wrote:or you are just a noob

Dwlee99 wrote:I have over a hundred games on this site alone dude

this sounds very bad for you lol

Says the “professional mafia player” claiming a daycop guilty in a normal
PUH-LEASE

im too lazy to check wiki here, im usually dont play here, so
my claim was mostly for fun like rvs

Bullshit. You were trying to get Dwlee elimmed and no one was listening to you, so you went for the one cardinal sin of mafia: the fake cop guilty claim.

i was just having fun, i said before that that i need to relax and dont play seriously

and also i was a bit angry bc of "wiki mafia af", but it doesnt matter. i knew at that moment that it was a beginning and i will change my mind like about hundred times. i wanted also to check the reaction of dwlee and the others. but most of all i had feeling that if scums are among active players like datisi-gamma (i didnt like the moment when you agreed with many towns in my list), this game can be rather difficult and maybe with low chances to win, so i didnt want to try hard at least on day 1.

all in all, later we'll have much more solid reasons to consider somebody scums, so we need just to wait strong info. like final votes, claims, etc.

In post 992, Almost50 wrote:

In post 988, Dwlee99 wrote:A50 why not salsa

I dunno. She tried to pocket me, didn't she? I'm glad to accept that pocket for today.

In post 822, Datisi wrote:

In post 740, Three wrote:

In post 687, Datisi wrote:

In post 664, Three wrote:What changed that made you decide her earlier logic was more sound than you originally thought?

like this annoys me because i never said her logic wasn't sound, she was scum *despite* because surprise, scum can make arguments that are logically sound

In post 688, Datisi wrote:obviously i don't find her as scummy as i did earlier but you see my point

You literally said you hated her posts though? I'm trying to understand how you think her posts make sense but still think she's scummy.

you're not serious.

yes, i said i hated her posts. because i thought they were scum!indicative for aimless questions and barebone solving.

however. she said "if one of wiki/dwlee is scum, the other isn't". that got misrepped as "one of wiki/dwlee is scum". she then claimed that she did not say that. i can understand that her claim of "i did not say that" makes sense, because she did not say that. that doesn't make her town. the fact that she was telling the truth about her previous post doesn't make her town. you do know that scum can sometimes make posts that make sense, right?

Interesting that you're just choosing to talk down to me here.

Besides that, you're not disagreeing with me here? What is your argument?

In post 822, Datisi wrote:

In post 740, Three wrote:

In post 689, Datisi wrote:

In post 664, Three wrote:What do you think she's saying?

I do have other reads, yes.

Can you explain the thought process behind your vote here?

oh my god

so you accused her of pocketing andres, right?

and she said that she finds it nice that you think scum!her would be able to pocket someone

and then you reply with "aha, so you're saying you think you could pocket someone!"

which (1) clearly isn't what she was saying, she was just saying your thoughts are nice and not agreeing with them, and (2) even if she was saying that, how is that a scumclaim? like, i think scum!me here would be able to pocket players like ico or t3, am i now lockscum too?

...What? I never accused her of pocketing Andres. I never accused her of pocketing anyone. She made that pocket comment towards T3, not me. And I didn't say she was lockscum either, hell, I didn't even say "aha, so you're saying you think you could pocket someone!" You're putting words in my mouth and you can easily fact check that. Everything you're accusing me of here factually did not happen.

The only thing I said was ask why she was scum claiming. I clearly interpreted it as scum claiming and asked her to clear it up, and then further explained why I saw it as scum claiming.

okay, that first bit is my mistake, i was rushing this morning and thought 521 was yours, not t3's.

doesn't defeat the rest of my point, however. 539 said "You're saying that you're mafia and that you think you could pocket somebody." i don't know how else to interpret that, considering, again, she did not say that. like, the rest of my post still applies, t3 thought she could be pocketing andres, she said it was nice t3 thought that she could be able to, and you jumped in claiming she was saying she thought that.

and like, 528 is also clearly not her claiming scum. it's a response to your 517, where you both called her read fake, and asked why should you be the one to want her out. her answer was "if you think my read is fake, then shouldn't you think i'm scum?". but you twisted it around into a scumclaim???

Ironic that you accuse me of "twisting" what her posts say but you keep refusing to quote what was actually said.

Umm...because there is only one reason my reads would be fake versus wrong?

Cuz I'm mafia pushing on you?

So, obviously you should want me out.

This looked like a scum claim, specifically the highlighted part. And I've already said this like three times now, but I asked why she's scum claiming and then had her clarify further when she said that wasn't what it is.

But I like you think I could pocket an experienced player.

This one is admittedly more my fault for misinterpreting. I'm guessing there were supposed to be commas in this, because without them I kept reading it as "But I like you, I think I could pocket an experienced player." But I think the intended meaning was "But I, like you, think I could pocket an experienced player." Which is a completely different meaning.

I do still think her read is fake though since she hasn't made any further push or made anything resembling a scum case on me.

In post 822, Datisi wrote:

In post 740, Three wrote:

In post 691, Datisi wrote:my thought process behind the vote is that you keep misconstructing people's arguments to the point i have a hard time believing you genuinely think what you're saying, especially since you claimed you have decent experience. and you seem to have zero reads besides sel. like it reeks of scum who is trying to appear busy by "tunneling" someone, and doing it with godawful arguments too

so what are your reads besides sel?

What argument have I misconstrued? This is the only one you could possibly argue that for and you're just wrong anyway.

I don't have "zero reads", I've already given takes.

How am I trying to appear busy or tunneling when I've been interacting with multiple people and keep getting dragged back to an argument from several hundred posts ago? I moved on yet I keep getting asked to defend my read. You can even see that I stopped talking to Sel about it before you dug it back up again, so I'm not sure what eise you want from me?

Why aren't you accusing Sel or Wiki of the same thing?

sel's "if one of wiki/dwlee is scum, the other is town", "scumclaiming", and "saying she thinks she can pocket". and my "how can you say sel has a decent argument while still thinking she's scum?".

ok, going trough your iso.
- scumreading wiki because unexplained reads
- scumreading then townreading gamma (asking town to towntell/good strategy)
- townreading wiki bc he's probably flailing
- the scumread of sel starts
- scumreading me for parroting t3
- scumreading me for scummy reaction over The Bad Read
- and finally, scumreading salsa

like, i'm sorry, but these aren't that many takes, even if i count the very minor one (gamma) that were given off-handedly over a single post or two. like, you've given takes on 5 people so far. not enough for me to know where your head is holistically.

a different question, why did you decide to vote salsa instead of me? you found both of us scummy. (not saying you're scum for voting her.)

holy shit the pedits, i was on this for way too long.

sel's "if one of wiki/dwlee is scum, the other is town"

I never "misconstrued" anything here. I guessed what she meant by it, once, days ago. Why are you so focused on this?

"scumclaiming" and "saying she thinks she can pocket"

We've been over this four times now. Holy shit.

"how can you say sel has a decent argument while still thinking she's scum?"

What about this is "misconstrued"? You're reaching hard here, it's ok to admit you were wrong.

Wait, so now you're just blatantly moving the goal posts? You accused me of having zero reads and of tunneling to look busy. I prove you wrong and you even admit you were wrong. But now the problem is that I don't have stances and reads? Why are you using logical fallacies here?

I voted Salsa because she's a lot scummier than you, I feel like this is self-explanatory. I'm still trying to evaluate whether you're actually scummy or just haphazardly posting to win an online argument.

In post 1012, Three wrote:

But I like you think I could pocket an experienced player.

This one is admittedly more my fault for misinterpreting. I'm guessing there were supposed to be commas in this, because without them I kept reading it as "But I like you, I think I could pocket an experienced player." But I think the intended meaning was "But I, like you, think I could pocket an experienced player." Which is a completely different meaning.

I do still think her read is fake though since she hasn't made any further push or made anything resembling a scum case on me.

In post 1012, Three wrote: I'm still trying to evaluate whether you're actually scummy or just haphazardly posting to win an online argument.

In post 767, Almost50 wrote:

In post 666, Three wrote:Thread activity dying out of nowhere.

@A50:

Can you explain why you voted yourself and then dipped out of the thread?

For you only:

I HATE IT when people use my activity to try and read me. I said it over and over again in the past: My activity has a dozen factors affecting it, and half of them are not even game-related. The other half would include the players list, and this one doesn't help me do my thing (which is troll and joke).

So, if people insist on using meta to read me, and if they insist on using the activity bit of the meta (you know meta has a lot more components that just activity level), then they should learn it the hard way. I am NOT going to defend myself over 5-6 games just because people want to be lazy and follow the wrong lead.

Andres for instance is one player who is a certified lurker, and if I used his activity level as a lead then I'd be eliminating him on D1 each and every game, because (A) Lurkers are +rand Scum (or you could rephrase it as "there's almost always a lurking Scum"), and (B) if he's not lurking then he's departing from his Town meta.

So, if Scum are pushing me and Town are falling for it then TOWN needs to be punished, and they will hopefully learn NOT to do it in the future.

IF Town is pushing me then they are handing the game to Scum, and I'm not going to fight BOTH factions over it. Again; a good lesson should be learnt.

Now if you want to find Scum you should be looking at Datisi/Wiki/Icon (probably just ONE of these is Scum, and my best guess is Datisi)

Another is in Dorsy/Ger (it's a 50-50 split for me)

I think Salsabil/Sylenee/Gamma should have the remaining 2 Scums in them

I vibed with this post a lot more than I thought I would, I kind of want to locktown you for it.

In post 936, T3 wrote:

In post 934, Salsabil Faria wrote:

In post 932, Dwlee99 wrote:I don't scumread you cause of meta, Salsa...

Sure!

VOTE: salsa
bad tone in this reaction so i'm just going to vote you and then unvote you because another player will do something bad on my catchup

In post 954, T3 wrote:

In post 803, Dwlee99 wrote:Okay salsa

i vaguely like this reaction

In post 956, T3 wrote:

In post 821, Andresvmb wrote:VOTE: Salsabil Faria

what actually is the scum motivation for whatever the heck salsa is trying to do rn

In post 959, T3 wrote:

In post 825, Andresvmb wrote:

In post 823, Salsabil Faria wrote:

In post 821, Andresvmb wrote:VOTE: Salsabil Faria

Your reactions to DW don’t make logical sense to me. DW expressed a high degree of certainty that you were Scum. You called that pathetic, and have heavily hinted at DW being bad Town. But why Town? And why so confrontational? DW isn’t actually a bad player. I just feel you should express more curiosity and less frustration towards DW and the view they’ve expressed. I would also argue DW is very much starting to feel like Town to me. It’s hard for players in general to be this pushy of a SR as Scum. It’s rare, and DW hasn’t operated like that if my recollection serves right. So I am starting to feel like you’re being forced into discrediting DW without calling them Scum, which is why I’ve voted you.

You’re also pushing Wiki who honestly seems almost like obvious Town to me. Or rather, I feel like the normal reaction to how Wiki is playing is to not want to execute it (Datisi’s “village idiot” description isn’t particularly charitable, but perhaps not that off target). I’m more inclined to want to give Wiki more time to see if their contributions are of any actual value.

Separately, I think A50’s frustration seems more Town indicative actually. I didn’t SR A50 for the activity level - I felt a specific post I quoted was Scummy. But the reaction they had to the pressure seemed genuine.

THIS MAKES SENSE

In post 960, T3 wrote:

In post 830, Almost50 wrote:*Sigh*

I was getting excited, but my wagon died too soon.

VOTE: ger

it depends on wherever the votes are at rn but i think we should run up a50

In post 961, T3 wrote:

In post 855, Wiki wrote:Im ready to elim any of them: ico, dwlee, datisi, salsa.
Should i vote salsa now?

yes

In post 965, T3 wrote:done with my catchup

i am VERY happy where my vote is

In post 970, T3 wrote:

In post 966, Wiki wrote:T3 you said this makes sense (andre treads a50), now you say we should run up a50. Does "run up" mean to elim?

It doesn't matter A50's alignment. We should put him to E-1

In post 970, T3 wrote:

In post 966, Wiki wrote:T3 you said this makes sense (andre treads a50), now you say we should run up a50. Does "run up" mean to elim?

It doesn't matter A50's alignment. We should put him to E-1

It's this the game where everyone says weird stuff?

@T3- you have reads that are not tone based?

@Three- Again...there is no reason town would fake a read here. Especially a scum read. So, you should be the first one to want be elim here...and make a case.

PS: Your vote was terrible. Which is...interesting cuz I felt like SF was soft defending you the first part of the game

In post 1014, Salsabil Faria wrote:

@GE

, forgot to ask earlier, which posts of mine are stopping you to vote me?

I’ll probably quote them in the morning (I’m up after a pretty freaky dream in the middle of the night rn)

In post 1006, Wiki wrote:

In post 1005, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 986, Wiki wrote:

In post 985, Dwlee99 wrote:

In post 983, Wiki wrote:or you are just a noob

Dwlee99 wrote:I have over a hundred games on this site alone dude

this sounds very bad for you lol

Says the “professional mafia player” claiming a daycop guilty in a normal
PUH-LEASE

im too lazy to check wiki here, im usually dont play here, so
my claim was mostly for fun like rvs

I didn't think it was for fun.

In post 1018, Selynee wrote:PS: Your vote was terrible. Which is...interesting cuz I felt like SF was soft defending you the first part of the game

In post 1019, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 1014, Salsabil Faria wrote:

@GE

, forgot to ask earlier, which posts of mine are stopping you to vote me?

I’ll probably quote them in the morning (I’m up after a pretty freaky dream in the middle of the night rn)

In post 1020, geraintm wrote:

In post 1006, Wiki wrote:

In post 1005, Gamma Emerald wrote:

In post 986, Wiki wrote:

In post 985, Dwlee99 wrote:

In post 983, Wiki wrote:or you are just a noob

Dwlee99 wrote:I have over a hundred games on this site alone dude

this sounds very bad for you lol

Says the “professional mafia player” claiming a daycop guilty in a normal
PUH-LEASE

im too lazy to check wiki here, im usually dont play here, so
my claim was mostly for fun like rvs

I didn't think it was for fun.

In post 395, geraintm wrote: if wiki retracts this claim at all, will vote for them untill they are gone from the game

I dont understand why ico is so town for all of you.
I even checked his meta in couple of games. There is a difference.
There are no reason to think ico is solid town.