Mafiascum.net

In post 121, Selkies wrote:

In post 114, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 111, Selkies wrote:

In post 107, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 105, Cabd wrote:

In post 103, MafiaSSK wrote:Cabd, do you have any serious reasons for your selkies vote?

Nope!

Wanna move your vote then?

This post interests me.

I'd personally find it great if Cabd could just come up with some real reasons for voting you for being scum, because you are scum.

I'm pretty sure you've had the pleasure of an RVS phase with Orci before.

Not in any games that I've seriously cared about.
(Sorry Cabd, again.)

In post 122, Selkies wrote:

In post 114, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 111, Selkies wrote:

In post 107, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 105, Cabd wrote:

In post 103, MafiaSSK wrote:Cabd, do you have any serious reasons for your selkies vote?

Nope!

Wanna move your vote then?

This post interests me.

I'd personally find it great if Cabd could just come up with some real reasons for voting you for being scum, because you are scum.

what's your "case" again?

Orcinus sorted me as a weak player. Town shouldn't be thinking of players as weak or strong.

In post 123, Selkies wrote:

In post 120, Cabd wrote:

In post 116, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 113, Cabd wrote:

In post 105, Cabd wrote:Nope!

then wanna come up with reasons for voting selkies?
Or explain how we're in RVS?

I'm voting them because ffery is in that hydra. I'm not going to srs vote until I damn well feel I'm ready to. Plus, this is just a circlejerk of us three, which even if somehow both you and selkies were scum, still means there's at least one more out there.

I think we've scared everyone else away. :/

Well, when they see 6 pages in an hour, maybe. :/

In post 119, MafiaSSK wrote:Who are you and why are you voting Katsuki?

Well, shit, those are some dumb questions.
1. I'm some dude in the game.
2. He called rule 6 bad because it punishes scum.

In post 124, MafiaSSK wrote:How good do you think ffery's scum game is?

One can plot it as a function of

(strength) = (other head) * (scum partners) 
                 _________________________________
                   (Scary People who can peg her)

In post 129, FourTrouble wrote:

In post 119, MafiaSSK wrote:Who are you and why are you voting Katsuki?

Well, shit, those are some dumb questions.
1. I'm some dude in the game.
2. He called rule 6 bad because it punishes scum.

See, I saw that as him giving a pre-game critique to Nat. Nothing alignment-oriented?

Seriously, you guys are playing achingly pro-scum so far, regardless of your actual alignment. It's basically 6 pages of meaningless clutter.

In post 132, FourTrouble wrote:Seriously, you guys are playing achingly pro-scum so far, regardless of your actual alignment. It's basically 6 pages of meaningless clutter.

I feel like if you can catch the tones of people in the beginning of the game, you can get some good player-connection analysis later in the game.

In post 131, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 129, FourTrouble wrote:

In post 119, MafiaSSK wrote:Who are you and why are you voting Katsuki?

Well, shit, those are some dumb questions.
1. I'm some dude in the game.
2. He called rule 6 bad because it punishes scum.

See, I saw that as him giving a pre-game critique to Nat. Nothing alignment-oriented?

Why would town even critique a rule that (maybe) punishes scum? I also think the critique assumes way too much. Why not assume the game is balanced around the rule? Town are uninformed; they're gonna assume the game is balanced. Scum are informed; they're more likely to critique a rule cause they know more about the setup. I also think scum are more likely to complain about a rule than punishes scum than town are. The critique is basically more likely to come from scum than town.

In post 134, FourTrouble wrote:

In post 131, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 129, FourTrouble wrote:

In post 119, MafiaSSK wrote:Who are you and why are you voting Katsuki?

Well, shit, those are some dumb questions.
1. I'm some dude in the game.
2. He called rule 6 bad because it punishes scum.

See, I saw that as him giving a pre-game critique to Nat. Nothing alignment-oriented?

Why would town even critique a rule that (maybe) punishes scum? I also think the critique assumes way too much. Why not assume the game is balanced around the rule? Town are uninformed; they're gonna assume the game is balanced. Scum are informed; they're more likely to critique a rule cause they know more about the setup. I also think scum are more likely to complain about a rule than punishes scum than town are. The critique is basically more likely to come from scum than town.

I actually really like this. Alright, you've convinced me.

VOTE: Katsuki

In post 130, Cabd wrote:

In post 124, MafiaSSK wrote:How good do you think ffery's scum game is?

One can plot it as a function of

(strength) = (other head) * (scum partners) 
                 _________________________________
                   (Scary People who can peg her)

This is actually pretty accurate IMO. There are some outliers.

MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 122, Selkies wrote: what's your "case" again?

Orcinus sorted me as a weak player. Town shouldn't be thinking of players as weak or strong.

surprisingly, we've had this convo. which you stopped responding to.

In post 68, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 62, Selkies wrote:

In post 59, MafiaSSK wrote:They shouldn't be classifying people into easy votes unless they are scum.

why is that?

Because you've already thought about who are the weak ones here. You have no reason to do so if you are town.

In post 72, Selkies wrote:that's not fery dumbfuck

Pedit: ssk, what makes you think i had to dwell on the question of "is ssk a easy lynch" for more than a second

Pedit: lol he ran

In post 133, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 132, FourTrouble wrote:Seriously, you guys are playing achingly pro-scum so far, regardless of your actual alignment. It's basically 6 pages of meaningless clutter.

I feel like if you can catch the tones of people in the beginning of the game, you can get some good player-connection analysis later in the game.

I don't see why meaningless clutter is the right milieu for reading tone/player-connection. It is literally the easiest shit to fake as scum. Wouldn't it be more effective to create difficult situations for the scum to respond naturally to as quickly as possible?

Some of the players of this game, myself included, employ a very conversational style of hunting and playing. For example, once ffery gets around to townreading me, which she'll do regardless of what she actually drew; she'll likely sit down and bounce reads and ideas off of me in a casual manner. You're welcome to object, but it won't make it stop.

In post 138, FourTrouble wrote:

In post 133, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 132, FourTrouble wrote:Seriously, you guys are playing achingly pro-scum so far, regardless of your actual alignment. It's basically 6 pages of meaningless clutter.

I feel like if you can catch the tones of people in the beginning of the game, you can get some good player-connection analysis later in the game.

I don't see why meaningless clutter is the right milieu for reading tone/player-connection. It is literally the easiest shit to fake as scum. Wouldn't it be more effective to create difficult situations for the scum to respond naturally to as quickly as possible?

What's easy for you is hard for others. But yes it is more effective to create difficult situations. But it is still somewhat effective to do it this way.

In post 137, Selkies wrote:

MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 122, Selkies wrote: what's your "case" again?

Orcinus sorted me as a weak player. Town shouldn't be thinking of players as weak or strong.

surprisingly, we've had this convo. which you stopped responding to.

In post 68, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 62, Selkies wrote:

In post 59, MafiaSSK wrote:They shouldn't be classifying people into easy votes unless they are scum.

why is that?

Because you've already thought about who are the weak ones here. You have no reason to do so if you are town.

In post 72, Selkies wrote:that's not fery dumbfuck

Pedit: ssk, what makes you think i had to dwell on the question of "is ssk a easy lynch" for more than a second

Pedit: lol he ran

Nuh-uh, you stopped responding to it.

I was all "Oh yeah, what makes me an easy lynch?". But I mean even responding seriously to that question, why should that thought have to cross your mind? Why should you have to consider it? Maybe you do think it, but it should just be brushed off and not put into writing.

In post 138, FourTrouble wrote:

In post 133, MafiaSSK wrote:

In post 132, FourTrouble wrote:Seriously, you guys are playing achingly pro-scum so far, regardless of your actual alignment. It's basically 6 pages of meaningless clutter.

I feel like if you can catch the tones of people in the beginning of the game, you can get some good player-connection analysis later in the game.

I don't see why meaningless clutter is the right milieu for reading tone/player-connection. It is literally the easiest shit to fake as scum. Wouldn't it be more effective to create difficult situations for the scum to respond naturally to as quickly as possible?

I always get at least a couple of good reads that stand the test of time during the first 10 or so pages of a game if the game is moving fast. Cabd utilizes the early chaos pretty well, too, regardless of alignment.

That's not relevant. Your argument was that I am scum because I'm considering who is and isn't a easy lynch. Ergo, whether you are an easy lynch or not is irrelevant to that argument. Which is why I said that you dropped that line of reasoning.

Which still leaves the question of why considering people easy or hard lynches is scummy :/

It scares me to be thinking this so early, but SSK looks pretty town.

In post 143, Selkies wrote:That's not relevant. Your argument was that I am scum because I'm considering who is and isn't a easy lynch. Ergo, whether you are an easy lynch or not is irrelevant to that argument. Which is why I said that you dropped that line of reasoning.

Which still leaves the question of why considering people easy or hard lynches is scummy :/

Eh. I guess it does get a bit WIFOM-y, because I guess there are some advantages for town looking at things like that.

Hey, I got nothing against a conversational style. I just find too much clutter at once makes it hard for me to keep focused on scumhunting (it all starts to sound the same, hence harder to distinguish scum/town posts).

Selkies, I've played with you guys before, right? I remember your name (ffery and orci both), although it might have been from reading your games. I can't remember exactly. That said, I do remember your "chaotic" style and I remember liking it, but it felt much more purposeful back then. I think that's the difference I'm noting here.

The argument that its scummy to consider who is or isn't an easy lynch is a massively stupid argument. I actually think its useful to know who the good/bad players are, as it helps evaluate their play individually, rather than based on general tells.

In post 144, Selkies wrote:It scares me to be thinking this so early, but SSK looks pretty town.

I agree.

In post 146, FourTrouble wrote:but it felt much more purposeful back then

Do you feel like we've been wasting our time the past 6 pages then? Because I'd beg to differ.

Also VOTE: katsuki