Mafiascum.net

In post 1096, Churros wrote:They can post though, not sure why Egix didn't say anything yet. I saw him post elsewhere/online

I wasn't entirely sure whether I could or not, sry. What's up?

In post 1079, Titus wrote:

In post 1078, gobbledygook wrote:Yeah I would lynch pisskop probably without a massclaim, but I think massclaim is necessary

I would rather keep the other mason hidden. We need the joat to claim. Then tmo we can talk about mass claim. If the other mason dies, I'll be on board with massclaim.

Outing the other mason might buy the JOAT more time alive. It'd force scum to pick between them.

In post 1040, eyestott wrote:

Last night I received a letter in the mail.

The message didn’t reveal who sent it, but they said that they’re

a JOAT (who) investigated PK night 1

and got guilty.

I have reason to believe these parts are true.

In post 1089, gobbledygook wrote:It is like so incredibly obvious who the mailer is and this is exactly the type of play they do lol

It's not obvious to me.

I have a good idea about the identity of the other mason, but nothing is standing our wrt to the mailer.

In post 1101, EspressoPatronum wrote:

In post 1079, Titus wrote:

In post 1078, gobbledygook wrote:Yeah I would lynch pisskop probably without a massclaim, but I think massclaim is necessary

I would rather keep the other mason hidden. We need the joat to claim. Then tmo we can talk about mass claim. If the other mason dies, I'll be on board with massclaim.

Outing the other mason might buy the JOAT more time alive. It'd force scum to pick between them.

Revealing the mason gives scum a roadmap to kill. A hidden mason in lylo or stopping their own mislynch is more valuable.

Hiding my last mason was something I did to great success in T v A. Scum just were literally out of mislynches because we coordinated.

In post 1104, Titus wrote:

In post 1101, EspressoPatronum wrote:

In post 1079, Titus wrote:

In post 1078, gobbledygook wrote:Yeah I would lynch pisskop probably without a massclaim, but I think massclaim is necessary

I would rather keep the other mason hidden. We need the joat to claim. Then tmo we can talk about mass claim. If the other mason dies, I'll be on board with massclaim.

Outing the other mason might buy the JOAT more time alive. It'd force scum to pick between them.

Revealing the mason gives scum a roadmap to kill. A hidden mason in lylo or stopping their own mislynch is more valuable.

Hiding my last mason was something I did to great success in T v A. Scum just were literally out of mislynches because we coordinated.

Fair point. If we don't end up massclaiming and if the mason makes it far, we're leaving it up to the mason to win a counterclaim scenario. I suppose they'll have to assess their chances there and plan accordingly.

I'd prefer the massclaim option for non-mason reasons though. The flavour provided eyestott has no apparent mechanical purpose, yet the flavour keeps getting publicly revealed every night. Knowing the roles left in the game could help us piece together the usefulness of the flavour.

My tinfoil theories are: (1) scum can't kill targets with revealed flavour, or maybe (2) there's a 3p here that can only target people if they know their target's flavour.

I wouldnt read too much into the flavor thing tbh. Given mastin's role and this apparent joat flavor seems to be a theme.

Weve seen zero evidence of a 3p

In post 1102, Egix96 wrote:

In post 1040, eyestott wrote:

Last night I received a letter in the mail.

The message didn’t reveal who sent it, but they said that they’re

a JOAT (who) investigated PK night 1

and got guilty.

I have reason to believe these parts are true.

Did you get a flavor from our mystery man?

In post 1106, pisskop wrote:I wouldnt read too much into the flavor thing tbh. Given mastin's role and this apparent joat flavor seems to be a theme.

Eyestott's entire role was to provide flavour + he also said he's informed about a flavour investigative. Not reading into flavour here means we must accept that eyestott and the investigative are effectively VTs.

What do you mean by JOAT flavour?

In post 1108, pisskop wrote:Did you get a flavor from our mystery man?

Not sure what you mean by that.

In post 1107, pisskop wrote:Weve seen zero evidence of a 3p

Emphasis on theory.

Intent to vote pisskop. Not sure if it's at L-2 or L-1 now so imma hold off on actually voting.

We should definitely do claims tomorrow if we don't do them today.

In post 1109, EspressoPatronum wrote:

In post 1106, pisskop wrote:I wouldnt read too much into the flavor thing tbh. Given mastin's role and this apparent joat flavor seems to be a theme.

Eyestott's entire role was to provide flavour + he also said he's informed about a flavour investigative. Not reading into flavour here means we must accept that eyestott and the investigative are effectively VTs.

What do you mean by JOAT flavour?

I mean, there's a theme around flavour, but I doubt it affect kills or etc

In post 1115, pisskop wrote:

In post 1109, EspressoPatronum wrote:

In post 1106, pisskop wrote:I wouldnt read too much into the flavor thing tbh. Given mastin's role and this apparent joat flavor seems to be a theme.

Eyestott's entire role was to provide flavour + he also said he's informed about a flavour investigative. Not reading into flavour here means we must accept that eyestott and the investigative are effectively VTs.

What do you mean by JOAT flavour?

I mean, there's a theme around flavour, but I doubt it affect kills or etc

What would you say the theme around the flavour is?

That we can give it and get it. Its like fruit vendor tho, is my point. everyone is going everywhere, but I suspect the real PRs are designed so as to muddled.

yo eyestott you need to tell us more about this message

Given everyone but alimada has posted, logic dictates alimada is the joat or the joat doesn't exist.

In post 1105, EspressoPatronum wrote:Fair point. If we don't end up massclaiming and if the mason makes it far, we're leaving it up to the mason to win a counterclaim scenario. I suppose they'll have to assess their chances there and plan accordingly.

I fully expect the mason to win any CC setup. Chronos bit a fair amount of suspicion before the replace out. We just see who never suspected him or had an abnormally strong read. I already know who the mason is.

In post 1119, Titus wrote:Given everyone but alimada has posted, logic dictates alimada is the joat or the joat doesn't exist.

IDK, but it looks to me like somebody's trying to frame me up for an easy lynch.

Alimedia, when you post next, could you confirm if you sent a guilty on me?

In post 1099, Eve wrote:ok cool alimdia

why would a scum mailman try to frame pisskop of all people when he was probably going to be the lynch anyway today?

I have no idea, but you get what I'm hinting at right? fuq it i'll just claim in the next post lmao.

In post 1103, EspressoPatronum wrote:

In post 1089, gobbledygook wrote:It is like so incredibly obvious who the mailer is and this is exactly the type of play they do lol

It's not obvious to me.

I have a good idea about the identity of the other mason, but nothing is standing our wrt to the mailer.

Mason is pretty obv tbh, but dont' say it

I'm gonna do a partial claim, and redact some stuff because I don't want to give other info away 'freely'

I am an mailman. I sent a mail to Eve last night. The contents of the mail shall remain secret for now, but it definitely is NOT 'I'm a JOAT and I got a guilty on pisskop N1', so that rules out me being redirected to eyescott.
I did not send a mail to anyone else last night. Therefore, I'm struggling to understand how eyescott got a mail last night.
I also did not send mail on N1, Eve should understand why.

The conclusion is that the mailman is either scum or eyescott is just bs'ing the whole thing up.