Mafiascum.net

In post 91, Corwinoid wrote:

In post 74, Elsa Jay wrote:Normally strong personalities bust heads first instead and lead to the players taking sides. Generally though it's not 100 percent best for just getting lurkers because even now you listed 4 people and in a 13p game there's 3 scum. So a town lurker already.

Would you say you have a strong personality?

I mean sometimes yeah. But they're WAY harder people in this site who'll fight to the figurative death when pinned against another in verbal combat. I like playing peace keeper sometimes.

In post 94, Alexcellent wrote:

In post 84, Elsa Jay wrote:I mean. When we get those lurkers to post, hopefully. If you wanna fight we can do that. I'm about to fall asleep though so it'll be later.

Let's not call it a fight but a friendly debate.

But also, you don't find value in trying to sort the people who are actively posting in the meantime?

I see the value but with how much your spewing your already giving enough for people to understand who you are. Prodding people for reactions is best so I can read them better day 2 looking for contradictions. And if I get shot at least I contributed to the standing of the game.

Eiralox wrote:@Elsa --- sum hav town read u for inactive-pointing, should I?

alternatives:
--- u know one or more scum are among inactives, so creating an early distance can aid u in long run.
---- u know one or more scum are among inactives, so your attempts to get them posting are not to aid town but to lessen their sussyness

so the reason some have greened you is the exact reason i'm waryish

I mean that's there perogative to do. People are also scumreading me for it, so it's not like I said a universally liked thing that only would be for townreads.

For your first alternative and your second one for that matter, why in the world would I say it out loud in the main thread for my "teammates" to see? Scum always have a thread of their own and the Mod confirmed in their rule post that private threads get daychat too.

In post 106, GoldfishFromTheMoon wrote: Gibus I also think is town

Why?

In post 118, GoldfishFromTheMoon wrote:

In post 116, geraintm wrote:

In post 56, clidd wrote:The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

Well, you would....



I'm going to have fun with this

In post 122, Eiralox wrote:

In post 118, GoldfishFromTheMoon wrote:

In post 116, geraintm wrote:

In post 56, clidd wrote:The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

it contributes nothing and draws no one out, basically stating the intent to lurk until others do the work yet in a flowery and overly-convulated manner.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

You get a naughty point for defending me

In post 125, Elsa Jay wrote:

Eiralox wrote:@Elsa --- sum hav town read u for inactive-pointing, should I?

alternatives:
--- u know one or more scum are among inactives, so creating an early distance can aid u in long run.
---- u know one or more scum are among inactives, so your attempts to get them posting are not to aid town but to lessen their sussyness

so the reason some have greened you is the exact reason i'm waryish

I mean that's there perogative to do. People are also scumreading me for it, so it's not like I said a universally liked thing that only would be for townreads.

For your first alternative and your second one for that matter, why in the world would I say it out loud in the main thread for my "teammates" to see?

Scum always have a thread of their own and the Mod confirmed in their rule post that private threads get daychat too.

Kind of liking Eiralox as town for this reason. Feels like a slight townslip if that's a thing.

In post 119, Vivax wrote:

In post 78, Corwinoid wrote:I'm here, I'm keeping up on things but I've been busy lately also. I'm consciously trying to observe more and drive a little less this game than I have in previous ones while I shake the rust off.

Well. This is an awful apologetic self-conscious post considering the timing and that there's quite a bit to go with already. I'm surprised I got to point that out first.
Somehow you're consciously trying to observe more but you miss to comment on things that seem relevant to many others?

VOTE: Corwinoid

I found Corwinoid's whole observing more thing to be kinda null. Maybe not the most pro-town thing in the world but doesn't feel super scummy either.
Do you have thoughts on others in this game, Vivax? Thoughts on George changed at all from before?

In post 130, Alexcellent wrote:

In post 119, Vivax wrote:

In post 78, Corwinoid wrote:I'm here, I'm keeping up on things but I've been busy lately also. I'm consciously trying to observe more and drive a little less this game than I have in previous ones while I shake the rust off.

Well. This is an awful apologetic self-conscious post considering the timing and that there's quite a bit to go with already. I'm surprised I got to point that out first.
Somehow you're consciously trying to observe more but you miss to comment on things that seem relevant to many others?

VOTE: Corwinoid

I found Corwinoid's whole observing more thing to be kinda null. Maybe not the most pro-town thing in the world but doesn't feel super scummy either.
Do you have thoughts on others in this game, Vivax? Thoughts on George changed at all from before?

Got a pool of players I think are townish, but that's not something I think is worth sharing early game as it might dissuade mafias from attacking them. But I think you can figure them out just by looking at who my persons of interest are and who is not.
Don't have a reason to get back to my impression on George either as I'm more interested into seeing how Corwinoid reacts to the vote, or others for that matter.

Ad corwinoid:
I'd expect someone who says (s)he's keeping up on things to deliver something and not follow it up with a time constraint claim. That reads like hidden guilt to me.

In post 128, geraintm wrote:

In post 122, Eiralox wrote:

In post 118, GoldfishFromTheMoon wrote:

In post 116, geraintm wrote:

In post 56, clidd wrote:The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

it contributes nothing and draws no one out, basically stating the intent to lurk until others do the work yet in a flowery and overly-convulated manner.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

You get a naughty point for defending me

that's funny i don't see it that way, my post reads pretty neutral? thinking ur just fishing for shade to throw atm lol.

In post 125, Elsa Jay wrote:
For your first alternative and your second one for that matter, why in the world would I say it out loud in the main thread for my "teammates" to see? Scum always have a thread of their own and the Mod confirmed in their rule post that private threads get daychat too.

okay my bad didn't read rules and see bit about day chat lol. i still think my first alternative is valid tho, if throwing shade on inactive scum teammates early on then if they get lynched you may seem less sus.

what are your reads on Gibus, Alexcellent and geraintm at the moment?

In post 132, Eiralox wrote:

In post 128, geraintm wrote:

In post 122, Eiralox wrote:

In post 118, GoldfishFromTheMoon wrote:

In post 116, geraintm wrote:

In post 56, clidd wrote:The rest of the discussion that goes on didn't suggest much in the AI ​​sense. Feels like almost everyone who posted so far is literally dancing in null variations tbh.

I need to read more to be able to infer something more expressive, which implies the need for more posts, interactions and etc.

VOTE: clidd

Whats wrong with that post? I thought it made sense.

it contributes nothing and draws no one out, basically stating the intent to lurk until others do the work yet in a flowery and overly-convulated manner.

That said, @geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). Their reply to @clidd's vote in itself was a defense of their method, so where does the decision to vote clidd come in? Is the above post decisive enough a motivation?

You get a naughty point for defending me

that's funny i don't see it that way, my post reads pretty neutral? thinking ur just fishing for shade to throw atm lol.

it felt like you were coming up with a reason for my vote, when there wasnt one. so i gave you anaughty point because it felt like you were trying to buddy up to me for some reason

In post 134, geraintm wrote: it felt like you were coming up with a reason for my vote, when there wasnt one. so i gave you anaughty point because it felt like you were trying to buddy up to me for some reason

"@geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). "

again, i explicitly state that you offered no reason for your vote. my analysis of clidd's post is wholly on me, and even if it is my inferred interpretation of why you quoted it, it was pretty clear that Goldfish and I had no idea as to why you voted.

So after the vote you rejoin me with one-liners, Goldfish you answer with an insinuation and the non-sequitur of 'having fun'.

So we're some way into this, Clidd votes for u, u vote for Clidd, and your entire motivation is that you have no reason, after quoting a specific post, again for nos specific reason other than replying to Goldfish as you did. Instead of weighing in on Alex/Elsa wagons you go an tangent with clidd and an eventual vote which you state has no meaning, after which you throw some very flimsy shade on me and to a lesser extent Goldfish.

I don't see where you're going with this, there's scummier activity than Clidd's atm tbh

Could use a bit more input from not_mafia. Gave me the impression he likes to laze off while being around a lot, but don't know if it's a mafia trait of him.

Otherwise clidd gives me slight mafia vibes. Bit too smooth of an entrance. More ruffle-some-hairs type of input would help to dissuade me.

I'll say I don't think Elsa is the droid many are looking for, but don't let me stop you from generating info.

Feeling good about my vote so far.

In post 133, Eiralox wrote:

In post 125, Elsa Jay wrote:
For your first alternative and your second one for that matter, why in the world would I say it out loud in the main thread for my "teammates" to see? Scum always have a thread of their own and the Mod confirmed in their rule post that private threads get daychat too.

okay my bad didn't read rules and see bit about day chat lol. i still think my first alternative is valid tho, if throwing shade on inactive scum teammates early on then if they get launched you may seem less sus.

what are your reads on Gibus, Alexcellent and geraintm at the moment?

I assure you I'm doing this specifically because I believe in what I'm saying.

Gibus is whatever. Seems to be another version of NotMaf who likes trolling instead of getting content. Usually NotMaf gives content later. Dunno about Gibus. Null but possible scum until they start giving their own opinion.

Alex actually wants to do stuff, so while that isn't synonymous with being town they're getting points for effort. Not unvoting yet though. Might still be holding something. Townier then the other 2 mentioned tho.

Gera who? Reading the ISO nothing stuck out besides people going after them for what seemed like a misinterpreted joke. Then trolling back. Though that might've been indictive of wanting to hide in the background at first too. So I'll leave that to clidd and folks to bust open.

In post 135, Eiralox wrote:

In post 134, geraintm wrote: it felt like you were coming up with a reason for my vote, when there wasnt one. so i gave you anaughty point because it felt like you were trying to buddy up to me for some reason

"@geraintm has offered no qualifier to the vote, other than the fact that @clidd has voted fro them(which they did not explicitly state). "

again, i explicitly state that you offered no reason for your vote. my analysis of clidd's post is wholly on me, and even if it is my inferred interpretation of why you quoted it, it was pretty clear that Goldfish and I had no idea as to why you voted.

So after the vote you rejoin me with one-liners, Goldfish you answer with an insinuation and the non-sequitur of 'having fun'.

So we're some way into this, Clidd votes for u, u vote for Clidd, and your entire motivation is that you have no reason, after quoting a specific post, again for nos specific reason other than replying to Goldfish as you did. Instead of weighing in on Alex/Elsa wagons you go an tangent with clidd and an eventual vote which you state has no meaning, after which you throw some very flimsy shade on me and to a lesser extent Goldfish.

I don't see where you're going with this, there's scummier activity than Clidd's atm tbh

my vote for clidd was purely random

UNVOTE: Elsa Jay

vote on flimsy terms, i got more sussy reads on others. not naming names atm. actually discovered that there's a lot of folk i don't have an immediate impression of and still a lot of lurkey behaviour by many, need to get pen and paper and pen all the names down lele

(these aren't straight scumreads, merely input on less actives/actionables)


100 per centum Trolly, stated as normal by others.

no input other than one nowhere-going question, their intent to hang back and observe before hard reads might be innocent and sincere, i know i'm never satisfied with my reads day one. State that they are busy.

more input, soft-read less scummy than others here. votes Goldfish, changes vote Alex after they vote Elsa "This is a very awkward progression. Why are you voting Elsa for trying to curb the low activity?"

way more active than others, more prolific poster than me. yet so much of it is what they did previous games, another third a meta-analysis of what they're likely to do, and the rest very soft reads with little confrontational evidence-seeking, the only asked questions are a bit watery and don't seem in the inquisitive spirit. Has yet to vote. Here because despite all the content I can't find anything for a read, seems as they're dipping their toes in the water. only def non-referential input i could find:

"One thing I will add is the guy who voted me is probably town."
"'Cause an entire day had passed and his "sticking with the basics" line suggests having an actual reason to vote that wasn't strong enough to actually go into detail on."
"The only thing I've really added to the game is that, based on my personal history, that guy who voted me is town. Which, at this point, is now more than almost every player in the game has added."
"Are you saying this to try to get people to post, or is this actually a serious suggestion?"
"I consider it a really bad sign that a 2 day old game is already talking about inactive hunting. This doesn't feel like a discussion that has a place this early in a day."
"I get "reaction test" vibes from Gibus. Would still look better if he'd actually done something since."

Votes Corwinoid. Asks Crescent: "What makes you think that gibus wasn't just random voting?"
Goldfish say they think Gibus is town, UNOwen asks "Why?"

Vote Cresecent. Vote Elsa after Alex slideshow. 3 posts, trolly.


despite their numerous naughty points and random vote i actually have more of a feel for them than the above folk, tho still putting them here as they haven't done much ferreting about imo.

Man, for having a forgettable first post, Eiralox is turning out more interesting then I thought. So that's good.

Now who Elsa to interrogate... NotMaf and Gibus probably won't be concerned with a wagon, so let's put fire under another fella.

VOTE: Owen

This seems like someone who I want the opinion of quickly. Tell me your secrets Owen.

In post 140, Eiralox wrote:

not enough input for me to form reads, scummish until otherwise for this simple reason:

(these aren't straight scumreads, merely input on less actives/actionables)

ISO Not_mAfia:

100 per centum Trolly, stated as normal by others.

ISO Corwinoid:

no input other than one nowhere-going question, their intent to hang back and observe before hard reads might be innocent and sincere, i know i'm never satisfied with my reads day one. State that they are busy.

ISO GeorgeBailey:

more input, soft-read less scummy than others here. votes Goldfish, changes vote Alex after they vote Elsa "This is a very awkward progression. Why are you voting Elsa for trying to curb the low activity?"

ISO Crescent

way more active than others, more prolific poster than me. yet so much of it is what they did previous games, another third a meta-analysis of what they're likely to do, and the rest very soft reads with little confrontational evidence-seeking, the only asked questions are a bit watery and don't seem in the inquisitive spirit. Has yet to vote. Here because despite all the content I can't find anything for a read, seems as they're dipping their toes in the water. only def non-referential input i could find:

"One thing I will add is the guy who voted me is probably town."
"'Cause an entire day had passed and his "sticking with the basics" line suggests having an actual reason to vote that wasn't strong enough to actually go into detail on."
"The only thing I've really added to the game is that, based on my personal history, that guy who voted me is town. Which, at this point, is now more than almost every player in the game has added."
"Are you saying this to try to get people to post, or is this actually a serious suggestion?"
"I consider it a really bad sign that a 2 day old game is already talking about inactive hunting. This doesn't feel like a discussion that has a place this early in a day."
"I get "reaction test" vibes from Gibus. Would still look better if he'd actually done something since."

ISO UNOwen

Votes Corwinoid. Asks Crescent: "What makes you think that gibus wasn't just random voting?"
Goldfish say they think Gibus is town, UNOwen asks "Why?"

ISO Gibus

Vote Cresecent. Vote Elsa after Alex slideshow. 3 posts, trolly.

ISO geraintm

despite their numerous naughty points and random vote i actually have more of a feel for them than the above folk, tho still putting them here as they haven't done much ferreting about imo.

I don't know what the colours/order means. Am I thr most scummy or keast scummy in yout list?

In post 142, geraintm wrote: I don't know what the colours/order means. Am I thr most scummy or keast scummy in yout list?

absolutely random, i don't have ranked list atm and i said these aren't my scum reads, merely analysis of folk who offer me less to go on. there are scummy peeps not included here ofc, but as going through their isos is gonna be more of a labor it's not something imma do today.

I might have to VLA the next day due to illness that suddenly started hitting me last night, but I'm going to try to see if I can process things first. I see stuff actually happened for once.

Going to get a Covid test tomorrow if it lingers like this or worsens.

In post 141, Elsa Jay wrote: This seems like someone who I want the opinion of quickly.

Sure sign of wisdom.

Secret 1/?: I think my vote is decent.

In post 136, Vivax wrote:Could use a bit more input from not_mafia. Gave me the impression he likes to laze off while being around a lot, but don't know if it's a mafia trait of him.

Otherwise clidd gives me slight mafia vibes. Bit too smooth of an entrance. More ruffle-some-hairs type of input would help to dissuade me.

I'll say I don't think Elsa is the droid many are looking for, but don't let me stop you from generating info.

Feeling good about my vote so far.

Elsa struck me as frustrated with the activity level and trying to leverage some sort of threat against the lurkers. I think that can go either way alignment wise, and I do find it curious how much of a talking point it became.

I think if Elsa is town there's a good chance of finding scum in those who shaded her.

So to analyze more: Alex's vote on Elsa feels awkward but doesn't particularly come off as scummy. Seems like a "put up or shut up" kind of vote when scum in that situation could've made a much easier vote and gone a lot more under the radar. Unless that's Alex's game it seems like something that just pulls attention.

Oh and I barely ever vote. MM and Carcalily (the only two voteiffs of the game before scum surrendered) were my only two votes of the last game, and I voted neither until <2 days left in the day. When and why I vote is much more important to reading me than who.

And Eiralox just strikes me as waiting for something to actually happen before doing something instead of trying to force it to happen.

The wall post.. Honestly doesn't really say anything though. It rehashes the game, but it doesn't actually provide any content that advances the game, as it includes little to no reads or reactions to what they're rehashing. It's just a long post that exists for the sake of existing.

In post 148, Crescent wrote:And Eiralox just strikes me as waiting for something to actually happen before doing something instead of trying to force it to happen.

The wall post.. Honestly doesn't really say anything though. It rehashes the game, but it doesn't actually provide any content that advances the game, as it includes little to no reads or reactions to what they're rehashing. It's just a long post that exists for the sake of existing.

so u don't see summations being helpful to town?
u saying we should go in blind here?
you're not providing input on any of those I mention(hell, Elsa used my post to start a vote and fingered UNOwen out of their hiding hole, and lo and behold, here you are posting as well after a dearth of inactivity?)

my wall of text of text might be boring but it sure as Zeus is pretty, and you taking such a strong stance on it has just rocketed my suspicion of you to a level where it never was. Hell, I'm tempted to vote for you right now but i'm yet to post by second wall of useless text so i'll let of for the moment.