Mafiascum.net

I wouldn't be upset.

Hello everyone!

Eragon is quite obviously town!

In post 1040, Eragon wrote:

In post 1007, Locke113 wrote:Ok so theres been a lot posted since I last posted so probably gonna multipost a fair bit here, apologies

Spoiler: Eragon

In post 912, Eragon wrote:

In post 861, Locke113 wrote:In post 506, ChibiBear wrote:

uhh ok?

isnt this what Roster said?

No, he thought that the scum partner had to be either me or Nom because we were telling him to back off in this thread when if his partner told him to back off, they could have done it outside of the thread

In post 743, Eragon wrote:because N_M is in this game :3

Intent to L-1 GrandWazoo

In post 760, Eragon wrote:Hammer hammer

I have fire in my eyes

In post 762, Eragon wrote:Would it be animal abuse to steal N_M’s hammer?

But if I’m a raven, then how can an animal abuse an animal

:3

Where is this previous explanation about why you didn't want to L-1 GW? Because in between this posts and 909 I see no previous explanation at all

understood


the explanation for not L-1'ing GW was so that there was no hammer until it was actually closer to EoD

I'm curious, how close to EoD do you like your wagons to get? since I think there was only a few days left by that point, though not sure so apologies if I'm talking out my arse

In post 1041, Eragon wrote:

In post 1011, Locke113 wrote:

In post 1004, Eragon wrote:they happen.

but they aren't something to expect.

anyone advocating for a quicklynch at this point is wolfy af.

There isn't anything inherently wrong with quicklynching, esp since in such a short time we got a lot of info to work with already, if we take too much time I guarantee this wagon will stall, which I get you don't want but you're scum so sorry but that would be a bad thing. Also just generally I don't see this need to use up the whole day unnecessarily

pedit

: also gl with all that Alac, its a interesting read

there is a fucking problem with quicklynching

when the game is literally fucking confirmed

What does this mean? I feel like I should be understanding this but I don't

In post 1046, Eragon wrote:

In post 1024, Locke113 wrote:Even if he did crumb shit, and it was a "reaction test", it still wouldn't make him town

@Roster:

I know, more interesting stuff happened after the post I quoted but thats kinda my point, the day is gonna drag out now and the wagon is gonna dissolve cause more people are gonna look back at his "reaction test" excuse and think well I didn't believe it at the time but maybe because the momentum is gone, my general point still stands

this is basically accurate. Its a risk/reward play. I've seen it used with game-solving reward. I was hoping to use it to absolutely lock my reads in, and i did get a couple of spicy reactions.
From a hypothetical point of view, it is indeed possible i used this as scum to gain towncred, but then whats the point of putting a bunch of attention and risk where it doesn't need to be. Whats the point of FAKING A SCUMSLIP as scum?

Why does anybody fake a scumslip? you can reaction test in much safer ways so there was plenty of risk where there didn't need to be no matter your alignment. I don't see how somebody willing to pull a ballsy move that could get them lynched as town wouldn't be willing to do similar as scum

I feel quite torn inside, one part of me wants to lynch Eragon because in my mind, doing something so out there and obviously scummy, saying all of a sudden "lol it was a reaction test!" then getting angry at people because people thinking he's scum for it is apparently a crime, is scummy as all hell.

But again, Milk's claim is so bad I wouldn't be opposed to jump wagons and get that fool lynched.

I think scum is among those two.

Nom... why is my claim so bad?

I don't know, because you claimed to roleblock someone that claimed a soft-investigative role? How about that?

It wouldn't have worked if they were town and it would have stopped them from claiming they had killed the nk (which would have made me think the person I blocked was maf) honestly I've already explained this. It was the best option I had because I thought I was dead anyway

Still makes no sense to RB someone who would either confirm a town or kill a scum.

That's still a very bad block lmao, like it most likely does nothing and you wasted your night. And in cases Elsa is fake claiming, I assume he did this to draw potential roleblockers on him for that night, and it worked, so it was also a waste in that sense.

I think it's more likely the scum team has a roleblocker anyway, given urap's flip.

Also why did you think you were going to die? You've been saying how you are going to die for a good part of today lol

Siiiiiigh. I soft claimed yesterday and Elsa correctly pointed out that I was screwed now because scum were going to kill me. I guess the soft claim was too soft because I didnt die (although I dont know why urap did). So. BecauseElsa, if shes town, is 1 shot, I'm the next death,

Also, why the actual heck does everyone just believe the first person to say a role is too OP or not balanced.

themilkcartonkid wrote:Also, why the actual heck does everyone just believe the first person to say a role is too OP or not balanced.

??

Nobody except one person has brought up your claim "being OP" or "not balanced", which was mostly a bad analysis point imo.

It's a matter of looking at your claim with the target you gave us and the two people that flipped so far. And the more I think about it, the more I think it makes sense if you were a scum-sided roleblocker given your block and urap's flip.

You also brought up the fact that despite softing you didn't die last night, and you justify it as scum not seeing your soft, where I think another simple explanation is that you're scum.

There's also your day today that has been mostly AtE, same as Eragon, so that doesn't help your case either.

Yeah. Let's go with that.

VOTE: themilkcartonkid

Sure, but dont just assume eragon is scum when I flip okay, actually think about it first okay?

In post 1088, themilkcartonkid wrote:Sure, but dont just assume eragon is scum when I flip okay, actually think about it first okay?

You make it sound like you don't actually think Eragon is scum.

Why are you voting someone you think isn't scum?

Dont vote eragon BECAUSE of how I flip. I think hes scum, but if this is a real test, I dont want to be responsible for the game

Oooh...interesting.

In post 1077, Locke113 wrote:

In post 1040, Eragon wrote:

In post 1007, Locke113 wrote:Ok so theres been a lot posted since I last posted so probably gonna multipost a fair bit here, apologies

Spoiler: Eragon

In post 912, Eragon wrote:

In post 861, Locke113 wrote:In post 506, ChibiBear wrote:

uhh ok?

isnt this what Roster said?

No, he thought that the scum partner had to be either me or Nom because we were telling him to back off in this thread when if his partner told him to back off, they could have done it outside of the thread

In post 743, Eragon wrote:because N_M is in this game :3

Intent to L-1 GrandWazoo

In post 760, Eragon wrote:Hammer hammer

I have fire in my eyes

In post 762, Eragon wrote:Would it be animal abuse to steal N_M’s hammer?

But if I’m a raven, then how can an animal abuse an animal

:3

Where is this previous explanation about why you didn't want to L-1 GW? Because in between this posts and 909 I see no previous explanation at all

understood


the explanation for not L-1'ing GW was so that there was no hammer until it was actually closer to EoD

I'm curious, how close to EoD do you like your wagons to get? since I think there was only a few days left by that point, though not sure so apologies if I'm talking out my arse

In post 1041, Eragon wrote:

In post 1011, Locke113 wrote:

In post 1004, Eragon wrote:they happen.

but they aren't something to expect.

anyone advocating for a quicklynch at this point is wolfy af.

There isn't anything inherently wrong with quicklynching, esp since in such a short time we got a lot of info to work with already, if we take too much time I guarantee this wagon will stall, which I get you don't want but you're scum so sorry but that would be a bad thing. Also just generally I don't see this need to use up the whole day unnecessarily

pedit

: also gl with all that Alac, its a interesting read

there is a fucking problem with quicklynching

when the game is literally fucking confirmed

What does this mean? I feel like I should be understanding this but I don't

In post 1046, Eragon wrote:

In post 1024, Locke113 wrote:Even if he did crumb shit, and it was a "reaction test", it still wouldn't make him town

@Roster:

I know, more interesting stuff happened after the post I quoted but thats kinda my point, the day is gonna drag out now and the wagon is gonna dissolve cause more people are gonna look back at his "reaction test" excuse and think well I didn't believe it at the time but maybe because the momentum is gone, my general point still stands

this is basically accurate. Its a risk/reward play. I've seen it used with game-solving reward. I was hoping to use it to absolutely lock my reads in, and i did get a couple of spicy reactions.
From a hypothetical point of view, it is indeed possible i used this as scum to gain towncred, but then whats the point of putting a bunch of attention and risk where it doesn't need to be. Whats the point of FAKING A SCUMSLIP as scum?

Why does anybody fake a scumslip? you can reaction test in much safer ways so there was plenty of risk where there didn't need to be no matter your alignment. I don't see how somebody willing to pull a ballsy move that could get them lynched as town wouldn't be willing to do similar as scum

i prefer to milk(pun not intended, but accepted) as much time as i can out of days

especially coming off games like stellaris where D1 town quickhammered town 6 minutes into D1

and then scum quickhammered town D2 like 2 days into D2


it means i don't like to rush the game until im confident i have the game 100% solved, and willing to bet the game on my solve

the best reaction tests are the most outlandish ones

hence "reaction test"

safe reactions tests are just that. safe. Oh hey i got a red on this kid. Oh nvm it was just a reaction check lol. thats FM 2.0a
and really easy to recognize

In post 1078, nomnomnom wrote:I feel quite torn inside, one part of me wants to lynch Eragon because in my mind, doing something so out there and obviously scummy, saying all of a sudden "lol it was a reaction test!" then getting angry at people because people thinking he's scum for it is apparently a crime, is scummy as all hell.

But again, Milk's claim is so bad I wouldn't be opposed to jump wagons and get that fool lynched.

I think scum is among those two.

i also lead up to it

and posted many many reasonings behind it

so its not just "all of a sudden saying lol reactions"

In post 1088, themilkcartonkid wrote:Sure, but dont just assume eragon is scum when I flip okay, actually think about it first okay?

aren't you voting me?

In post 1090, themilkcartonkid wrote:Dont vote eragon BECAUSE of how I flip. I think hes scum, but if this is a real test, I dont want to be responsible for the game

oh, i still think its fake and want to lynch him, but incase im wrong dont blame me hurrr

VOTE: Milk

Grrr I’m kind of seeing that it might have been a reaction test. Don’t do it again though ty.