Mafiascum.net

In post 103, Seiko x Naomi wrote:at best it says he thinks town have reasons to lie in a mass flavorclaim, or any massclaim at all and that needs to be addressed now rather than later. Town have no reason to lie. At all.

You and your partner have played far far far too many games for me to believe you actually mean this.

VOTE: Seiko x Naomi

Votecount 1.3

Dunnstral

(1) - Shadow_step

Seiko x Naomi

(2) - borkjerfkin, Syryana

Not Voting

(6) - Dunnstral, Seiko x Naomi, Obvious Alt, Aj The Epic, Charloux, The Oxford Bubbles

With

9

players eligible to vote, it’s

5

to lynch!

Day 1 will end in

(expired on 2017-01-26 06:01:00).

Mod Notes:

None!

Nothing really stood out as scummy so far for me. Honestly i don't even have any nullscum reads. Guess i'll wait for an opinion from Shadow/Obvious/Aj the great.
I think i will have to POE this game.

"Aj The Great"... stop killing me oml

In post 9, Syryana wrote:VOTE: Aj the Epic

Wagering millers must die.

I almost got away with this shit too. Should've.

The Oxford Bubbles wrote:Scum don't scumhunt. They use their actions to tell a story they're creating. True events aren't like constructed stories. They aren't simple and don't follow an easy sequence - linear.
Syryana doesn't use his actions to probe further, dig deeper than he could. He makes a move, explains it, and then moves on.
Controlled. Linear.

~ Raven

All absolutes are bullshit.

In honesty, scum can scumhunt, they're just going to be wrong. You're writing a narrative that is pretty patently not true.

In post 128, Aj The Epic wrote:All absolutes are bullshit.

In honesty, scum can scumhunt, they're just going to be wrong. You're writing a narrative that is pretty patently not true.

Scum can pretend to scum-hunt, but they can't scum-hunt unless they're in a multi-ball game. I think we're on the same page but you're thinking of pretending to hunt for scum as being the same as scum-hunting.

~ Raven

Probably wont be around much till

Fucking phone.

Till monday. Got company.

first things first, I don't think bork is scum. I could easily be wrong on this since I have misread him very badly in the past, but in general I think the most apparent tell with him is that when he's scum a lot of his posts and reads are just really flat and going-through-the-motions and I don't see that here (the read on Syr falls in pretty direct contrast to it). I also think that most of the more subtle things he's posting about are pretty reasonable, i.e. 120 about Dunn. I will likely revisit this if I have reason to question it later.

second, Charl is town. I don't think 87 comes from scum, and beyond that I'm fine with his posts in general. I pretty obviously disagree with notty's read here; ideally I'd let him handle it himself, but if he continues not to be here poke me again and I can talk more about it.

TOB's push on Syr is terrible, but I am not sure that it is terrible in a scummy way. I want an explanation for their town read on OA, though.

I don't have any town read on Dunn; I don't have any issues with the bulk of his push on us (save potentially the post bork pointed out), but it's nowhere near unfakeable.

AJ's 128 is really underwhelming and since notty seems to be gone/not have a vote down I'm going ahead and voting here.



bork, when you're around can we talk about Syr?

In post 125, Syryana wrote:

In post 103, Seiko x Naomi wrote:at best it says he thinks town have reasons to lie in a mass flavorclaim, or any massclaim at all and that needs to be addressed now rather than later. Town have no reason to lie. At all.

You and your partner have played far far far too many games for me to believe you actually mean this.

VOTE: Seiko x Naomi

for what it's worth, I agree with you that notty's stance here is wrong; do you want me to talk more about it or do you want to sort it out with him directly?

I'm around-ish, a lot of people are going to bed. What do you want to talk about?

(When did you misread me badly? Tales of you?)

I'd rather hash it personally.

FWIW I was hoping for more of an NS presence early game -- I find him easier to read than you (I don't feel that I've ever really had a game where I was super wrong about him)

I feel like I have questions for pie but I can't think of them and I'm busy for an hour or so

In post 134, borkjerfkin wrote:I'm around-ish, a lot of people are going to bed. What do you want to talk about?

(When did you misread me badly? Tales of you?)

I generally agree that his posts aren't scummy, and that his opening was either a legitimate reaction test or him feigning a reaction test, but I don't know if I see why the way he did it is more likely the former than the latter. can you walk me through it in more depth?

(and yeah, that. <- still wishes that game never happened)

In post 132, Seiko x Naomi wrote:I don't have any town read on Dunn; I don't have any issues with the bulk of his push on us (save potentially the post bork pointed out), but it's nowhere near unfakeable.

Really? Even after that last game?

In post 136, borkjerfkin wrote:FWIW I was hoping for more of an NS presence early game -- I find him easier to read than you (I don't feel that I've ever really had a game where I was super wrong about him)

And to clarify, i am not scumreading him for not being here (although what he has posted has been pretty banal) just wish he was.

Wouldn't mind lynching shadow-step at the moment

In post 136, borkjerfkin wrote:FWIW I was hoping for more of an NS presence early game -- I find him easier to read than you (I don't feel that I've ever really had a game where I was super wrong about him)

notty's RL is really busy. I think he should be around at some point or another, but regardless, I was only even able to drag him into this game because you were in it. <_>

Dunnstral wrote:Wouldn't mind lynching shadow-step at the moment

Why? You'd advocate a PL 2 days into d1?

In post 139, Dunnstral wrote:

In post 132, Seiko x Naomi wrote:I don't have any town read on Dunn; I don't have any issues with the bulk of his push on us (save potentially the post bork pointed out), but it's nowhere near unfakeable.

Really? Even after that last game?

I mean, the last game you were making a push on me that was really obviously contrived.

I think "I'm weirded out by notty's 'slip'" is a lot more reasonable than anything you did in that game, given notty's angle was pretty clearly wrong. either way, I do think you would be capable of making the same push as scum, hence why I say it isn't unfakeable and that I don't think you're town for it.

In post 138, Seiko x Naomi wrote:can you walk me through it in more depth?

the way he reached out to me specifically as if i was in danger of dissecting the issue too much before people talked about it fully. I don't think scum would have cared if i did that.

I don't feel that 71 feels like a backpedal because people didn't like him jumping on the wagon, it feels like an earnest mindset.

I don't know how to better explain it. A lot of people seem to want to shoot down this townread without doing anything other than replace it with nothing substantial.

In post 143, Aj The Epic wrote:

Dunnstral wrote:Wouldn't mind lynching shadow-step at the moment

Why? You'd advocate a PL 2 days into d1?

You are most certainly not commenting on anything but the lowest hanging "bad theory" fruit

In post 143, Aj The Epic wrote:

Dunnstral wrote:Wouldn't mind lynching shadow-step at the moment

Why? You'd advocate a PL 2 days into d1?

Never said anything about pl

In post 132, Seiko x Naomi wrote:second, Charl is town. I don't think 87 comes from scum, and beyond that I'm fine with his posts in general. I pretty obviously disagree with notty's read here; ideally I'd let him handle it himself, but if he continues not to be here poke me again and I can talk more about it.

I think you should talk more about it; 87 is, by his own admission, not a legitimate claim. Why is this a slam dunk town post for you?

I agree with bork.

~ Raven