Mafiascum.net

This time I take the leap of faith by not checking to see if this automatically generated votecount is totally accurate.

haha look guys i nailed the pagetop

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote:Or you're asking questions to people who likely aren't going to give you an answer. Namely, Joral, the 3rd most inactive player in the game right now who has said himself that they are 'not of a mind to provide meaningful commentary yet'

thought he meant something like "I don't have anything to comment on yet"

In post 124, Tommy Egan wrote:

In post 104, Creature wrote:My meta is really the only relevant discussion here?

So I haven't posted something that caught my eye on Espeonage and I haven't said a scum!espeonage spews a scum!seal no? I must have just imagined that then.

*cough*Creature*cough*

Oh I think I made some mistakes in that post gimme a sec

ByronVilla wrote:
In you want me to go in depth on everyone gladly!

Should be 'If you want me to go in depth...

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote:

Khan

- Seems to put himself on a high horse, saying that he's not interested in being friendly and just wants to win, and then tries to accuse Hopkirk of being condescending, when he's actually the one in the wrong.

Is throwing sarcy comments everyone

and whilst he is actually participating in the discussion, I'm not getting good vibes off of him.

Should be 'Is throwing sarcy comments at everyone'

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote: Or you're asking questions to people who likely aren't going to give you an answer.

Namely, Joral, the 3rd most inactive player in the game right now

who has said himself that they are 'not of a mind to provide meaningful commentary yet'

Should be 'Namely, Joral, the 2nd most inactive player (tied with Seal if we're going off of post count) in the game right now'

In post 128, Tommy Egan wrote:

In post 124, Tommy Egan wrote:

In post 104, Creature wrote:My meta is really the only relevant discussion here?

So I haven't posted something that caught my eye on Espeonage and I haven't said a scum!espeonage spews a scum!seal no? I must have just imagined that then.

*cough*Creature*cough*

Oh right

VOTE: Espeonage

I still expect joral to have time to play this game.

In post 131, Creature wrote:I still expect joral to have time to play this game.

Well yeah but one thing I don't get is how you're getting annoyed at specifically Joral for being inactive, when at the same time Seal's posted the same amount of times and Not_Mafia has Not_Even_Posted yet. Like how you gonna get mad at Joral when those two also exist. It feels like you just kinda wanna push them to the side whilst you focus on Joral.

I'm not mad at joral, just giving him stuff to do when he returns lol

I've done this couple of times before

In post 61, PenguinPower wrote:

In post 60, Ircher wrote:Good, you're scum anyway.

Hmm...why?

Okay, I wasn't a huge fan of Kublai at the start because of the way he was telling Penguin that he wasn't playing to win condition by self-voting et cetera in the first few pages of the game.

Also, all my votes since then have had zero reasoning behind them other than to see if someone would say anything, which hasn't happened.

108/118/122.
The progression here from Byron pings me a bit. Does stuff/gives thoughts when asked, but only really when asked. Could be reactive, could just be he was going to post the 118/122 anyway and its just a coincidence.

VOTE: Byron since guy i'm voting is inactive anyway

'Also, all my votes since then have had zero reasoning behind them other than to see if someone would say anything, which hasn't happened.'

Looked back at where Ircher switched from Creature to me. Didn't think it fit, then realized it did. Sounds honest about thought process I guess.

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote:

In post 119, Kublai Khan wrote: @ByronVilla - Thanks for stepping out into the open. Would you give a rundown of everyone so I can identify your partner?

VOTE: BryonVilla

In you want me to go in depth on everyone gladly!

PP

- Is promoting discussion and getting information out there, talked about this in my last post.

I don't think I really see this? Penguin has been talking, but like me, he hasn't really said anything useful.

Byron wrote:

Khan

- Seems to put himself on a high horse, saying that he's not interested in being friendly and just wants to win, and then tries to accuse Hopkirk of being condescending, when he's actually the one in the wrong. Is throwing sarcy comments everyone and whilst he is actually participating in the discussion, I'm not getting good vibes off of him.

Why aren't you getting good vibes? To clarify, how does being condescending give off bad vibes? (Also, define sarcy because I'm too lazy to look it up.)

Byron wrote:

Creature

-

In post 120, Creature wrote:

In post 118, ByronVilla wrote:Creature is also worrying me slightly, but he seems like more of a frustrated town than scum so far.

and that's worrying?

Well yeah it is, it feels like you're frantically pumping out posts with no real content in them in order to appear like you're promoting discussion. Either your posts are pure fluff like:

Creature wrote:brb finding out who Tommy Egan is

Creature wrote:Yeah, this town will need to be carried.

Or you're asking questions to people who likely aren't going to give you an answer. Namely, Joral, the 3rd most inactive player in the game right now who has said himself that they are 'not of a mind to provide meaningful commentary yet'

Creature wrote:joral, what do you think about PP doing absolutely nothing?

Creature wrote:joral, do you think Tommy Egan is someone who has played recently?

Creature wrote:joral, how bad post 98 is for you?

This isn't making meaningful discussion. What would be making meaningful discussion is getting information out of the people already in the thread, for example Creature, what makes you say that PP has done 'absolutely nothing'? In my opinion he's done quite a lot compared to say, you.

I mean, I do think the string of posts from Creature was him playing against his typical meta; i.e.: they were on the forced side, but I don't think there is necessarily anything wrong with his approach at the moment.

Byron wrote:

Ircher

- Seems to be a fan of small posts. Gets his point across and I can't say I really have a lean on him, but I'd like to see more meat on the bone if that makes sense?

You know, I would like you to elaborate on how exactly I am getting my point across because I was under the impression that I was being quite obscure.

Byron wrote:

Hopkirk

- Not as much as a townread as PP is for me, but I can follow the thought process on his reads and so he's at the very least neutral for me.

Okay.

Byron wrote:

Golden

- Whilst I'm a PP fan right now, I can appreciate his #68 & #75, they come off as promoting discussion and that's the main thing to do in this phase of the game imo, so he's a neutral for me right now.

Why must you have only one townread? Can't Golden be a townread for you as well as Penguin?

Byron wrote:

Performer/UnrealSeal/joral/Espeonage/Tommy Egan/Not_Mafia

- Haven't posted enough content to get any good reads on them right now.

Okay.

Oh, VOTE: Byron.

In post 70, ByronVilla wrote:

In post 60, Ircher wrote:Good, you're scum anyway.

I don't like it when people make these kind of claims with no explanation in the post.

UNVOTE: Performer
VOTE: Ircher

You don't have to like it, but that isn't something to vote someone for. Or is there more to this?

In post 108, ByronVilla wrote:

In post 104, Creature wrote:My meta is really the only relevant discussion here?

If you want some relevant discussion start some. There's no point just sitting there whining that 'this town needs to be carried' on Page 5, that's not going to help town in the slightest.

You really ought to give Creature more time... It's still early, and I don't really see you doing anything either anyway.

In post 118, ByronVilla wrote:

In post 114, Hopkirk wrote:Where are you at Byron?

Currently Khan has caught my eye, calls you condescending whilst being condescending himself (see the interactions between #76 & #84), feels like flawed logic.

Being a hypocrite is hardly a scumtell.

Byorn wrote:Creature is also worrying me slightly, but he seems like more of a frustrated town than scum so far.

In terms of any town reads so far, I'm leaning a bit towards PP. I appreciate his efforts to get wagons going, and his move to vote himself really helped to fuel some discussion.

Hmm.........................................................................................................................................

byron wrote:Speaking of me liking wagons though, this Khan wagon is picking up some steam and I want to hop on it.

UNVOTE: Ircher
VOTE: Khan

I don't think it was ever picking up any steam, esp. considering I jumped off it earlier... Also, your wording.... is..... really..... pinging.... me..... here.....

In post 129, ByronVilla wrote:Oh I think I made some mistakes in that post gimme a sec

ByronVilla wrote:
In you want me to go in depth on everyone gladly!

Should be 'If you want me to go in depth...

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote:

Khan

- Seems to put himself on a high horse, saying that he's not interested in being friendly and just wants to win, and then tries to accuse Hopkirk of being condescending, when he's actually the one in the wrong.

Is throwing sarcy comments everyone

and whilst he is actually participating in the discussion, I'm not getting good vibes off of him.

Should be 'Is throwing sarcy comments at everyone'

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote: Or you're asking questions to people who likely aren't going to give you an answer.

Namely, Joral, the 3rd most inactive player in the game right now

who has said himself that they are 'not of a mind to provide meaningful commentary yet'

Should be 'Namely, Joral, the 2nd most inactive player (tied with Seal if we're going off of post count) in the game right now'

I honestly don't think any of us really care too much about these fixes? This seems more of an excuse to like you are doing something.

In post 121, Creature wrote:

In post 119, Kublai Khan wrote:@Creature - Why does your multi-posting look forced?

Because I gotta force players to post content?

Yeah, but deliberately hitting submit mid-thought and finishing the thought on the next post doesn't force players to post content. When I say it feels forced, I mean it seems like you're deliberately doing it because people said you put more effort in as town.

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote:Is that a good enough run-down for you Khan?

Not as useful as I'd hoped. Too many non-posters. Why did you wait for a prompting before questioning Creature on stuff?

In post 140, Ircher wrote:

byron wrote:Speaking of me liking wagons though, this Khan wagon is picking up some steam and I want to hop on it.

UNVOTE: Ircher
VOTE: Khan

I don't think it was ever picking up any steam, esp. considering I jumped off it earlier... Also, your wording.... is..... really..... pinging.... me..... here.....

Oh good, Ircher has the same thinking that I do.

Ircher/KK are both prob town here.

In post 121, Creature wrote:

In post 119, Kublai Khan wrote:@Creature - Why does your multi-posting look forced?

Because I gotta force players to post content?

If you have questions for me, you can post them all in one post, you don't need to do some kind of weird multi-whatever. And forcing it won't necessarily get you what you want anyway. I realized late that the game had started, and that I needed to at least say something to announce presence and avoid prodding. Now that I've slept and had a chance to read and process the thread, I have something to say.

Now, in answer to what you were asking: Considering this and the labyrinth game are the first two I've been involved with in 8 years or so, I have no clue who would have posted what when between then and now. So my opinion on whether Tommy has played recently, or who it might be, or any of that would be just as easily served by the dice roller than my intelligent input. So far he doesn't sound like anyone in labyrinth, so that would be the only thing I have to go on.

Post 98... Other than your amazingly garbled English in asking the question, I don't think the constant meta discussion is useful. First off, once really mentioned out in the open, or the target goes really try-hard to pretend it's not (The long multi-list of questions, especially targeted at me kinda looks like this). That's my call there.


I like Robster for town. decent analysis of early game state at least.

Penguin... Early self-voting might not necessarily be against win con, but it strikes me as odd. I don't see how it would provoke any useful information, since all discussion of it then boiled down to that point and whether it was or not. As a discussion provoker, I think it failed. I don't see much light coming from this post train. As for his disappearance, it is the weekend, some people actually do things not related to their computer. neutral.

Not really any light from the Hopkirk - Khan discussion over LAMIST. Not knowing the acronym doesn't strike me as useful, and I don't see the force-parading of town-ness that Hopkirk seems to imply. Overall no negatives about Hopkirk for the moment.

Though I do have a question for Khan though. How do you explain the naked accusation and vote on Byron, and why should I not read it as an OMGUS play?

Ircher, not a fan of the blind voting hoping for a reaction. As noted, it often doesn't work. Later posts have had a decent logic to them. think town.

Would like to know why the flip from Espeonage, from the negative post about Penguin's "jump on a wagon" comment, then what appears to be a naked jump on the Penguin wagon? What's with that?

Byron... Feels weird. Nothing I can point to directly, gut feel is saying off, especially on the wagon comment. Did not feel it was picking up any steam at the time.
Seal, Performer, not_mafia... nothing really to read there.

In post 138, Ircher wrote: Why aren't you getting good vibes? To clarify, how does being condescending give off bad vibes? (Also, define sarcy because I'm too lazy to look it up.)

Sarcy = Sarcastic. My original thought process was that being condescending means that you're going to be disregarding the opinions of others and only respecting that of your own. Now I realize that by doing this you're going to be provoking people, and while that can be a good strat in order to get people talking, if you're going to go into a game thinking you're the best then it's likely not going to end well for you, however I see the benefits of a strat like this now and I'm not sure if my read on Khan is well placed anymore.

In post 138, Ircher wrote: You know, I would like you to elaborate on how exactly I am getting my point across because I was under the impression that I was being quite obscure.

Well whilst you were naked voting left and right, there was reasoning to most of them that stems from this:

In post 58, Ircher wrote:

In post 45, Kublai Khan wrote:

In post 44, Ircher wrote:

In post 37, Kublai Khan wrote:p.edit: huh. Why, Ircher?

Why not?

Why'd you ask permission?

Because I wasn't gonna solo-vote someone; that would accomplish absolutely nothing. There is strength in numbers.

Every single vote from this post onward you're voting someone who already has a vote on them, and so I'm assuming at this point you're doing it for the sake of pressure more than actual scumreading, as when a wagon shifts you instantly seem to hop onto it.

Ircher wrote: Why must you have only one townread? Can't Golden be a townread for you as well as Penguin?

Well whilst he was doing good stuff he had a negative read on another one of my townreads, and so I didn't feel comfortable leaning town on him just yet, however I probably shouldn't be relying on another townlean to avoid townleaning on someone else, I just felt it would be a bit of a contradiction.

Ircher wrote:

In post 70, ByronVilla wrote:

In post 60, Ircher wrote:Good, you're scum anyway.

I don't like it when people make these kind of claims with no explanation in the post.

UNVOTE: Performer
VOTE: Ircher

You don't have to like it, but that isn't something to vote someone for. Or is there more to this?

Well I wanted to get you to give reasonings in your posts, and I thought the best way to go about it would be to try and apply pressure to you through a vote. I never really felt you were scum, it was more for pressure's sake.

Ircher wrote:

byron wrote:Speaking of me liking wagons though, this Khan wagon is picking up some steam and I want to hop on it.

UNVOTE: Ircher
VOTE: Khan

I don't think it was ever picking up any steam, esp. considering I jumped off it earlier... Also, your wording.... is..... really..... pinging.... me..... here.....

Ok I feel like I need to clear this up, I hadn't properly counted who had hopped on/off the wagon since the vote count, and so I was under the assumption that Khan was still on 3 votes, and so I thought it was a wagon.

Ircher wrote:

In post 129, ByronVilla wrote:Oh I think I made some mistakes in that post gimme a sec

ByronVilla wrote:
In you want me to go in depth on everyone gladly!

Should be 'If you want me to go in depth...

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote:

Khan

- Seems to put himself on a high horse, saying that he's not interested in being friendly and just wants to win, and then tries to accuse Hopkirk of being condescending, when he's actually the one in the wrong.

Is throwing sarcy comments everyone

and whilst he is actually participating in the discussion, I'm not getting good vibes off of him.

Should be 'Is throwing sarcy comments at everyone'

In post 122, ByronVilla wrote: Or you're asking questions to people who likely aren't going to give you an answer.

Namely, Joral, the 3rd most inactive player in the game right now

who has said himself that they are 'not of a mind to provide meaningful commentary yet'

Should be 'Namely, Joral, the 2nd most inactive player (tied with Seal if we're going off of post count) in the game right now'

I honestly don't think any of us really care too much about these fixes? This seems more of an excuse to like you are doing something.

Yeah I was probably the only one that cared, but I wanted to make sure that no-one misread the readlist and took something else from it. I really wasn't 'doing' anything here.

Also I know I've been hopping around a lot but my vote on Khan is probably misplaced and so I want it off of him. Creature's been doing some really weird play, and whilst I'd like to move my vote on him I don't have enough confidence in my read on him yet, so for now I'm just going to:
UNVOTE: Khan

Gamestart PMs are cool

In post 143, joral wrote:Though I do have a question for Khan though. How do you explain the naked accusation and vote on Byron, and why should I not read it as an OMGUS play?

I guess it's a calculated risk. My being the target of the vote is irrelevant. I saw an odd play that could be indicative of scum, so I called attention without explaining why to see who else picks up on it.

If the wagon comment struck you as odd, then you shouldn't see my vote as an OMGUS.

In post 143, joral wrote:Would like to know why the flip from Espeonage, from the negative post about Penguin's "jump on a wagon" comment, then what appears to be a naked jump on the Penguin wagon? What's with that?

Is this directed at me?

Because I don't think I understand what you are trying to say here if it is.

In post 147, Ircher wrote:

In post 143, joral wrote:Would like to know why the flip from Espeonage, from the negative post about Penguin's "jump on a wagon" comment, then what appears to be a naked jump on the Penguin wagon? What's with that?

Is this directed at me?

Because I don't think I understand what you are trying to say here if it is.

Not you. Espeonage.

Posts 50 and 55 seem to question the jumping on of the PP or other wagon. then, 87 naked votes PP. Just seemed a little contradictory, and was wondering what prompted the vote.

In post 94, Tommy Egan wrote:Penguin can be town for now, I didn't like how Espeonage jumped on Penguins posts when Penguin was only doing something I definitely see at least moderately often in RVS.
Scum!Espeonage spews scum!Seal from Seals opening post.

Why are their opening posts scummy?